header-logo header-logo

24 October 2025
Issue: 8137 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , In Court
printer mail-detail

Philip Sales is selected as next Deputy President

Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year

The role involves working with the President to oversee the judicial work of the court, and acting as an ambassador of the court at home with government and legal officials and overseas.

Lord Sales, who joined the Supreme Court in 2019, said: ‘The Court has a reputation around the world as a source of leading judgments of the highest quality in all areas of law.

‘As Deputy President, I am looking forward to continuing to uphold the Court’s traditions of integrity, impartiality and legal excellence.’

Lord Sales attended the Royal Grammar School in Guildford, before reading law at Churchill College, Cambridge, and Worcester College, Oxford. He was called to the Bar in 1985, practising commercial and Chancery law at 11KBW. In 1997, he was appointed First Treasury Junior Counsel (also known as ‘Treasury Devil’), advising and representing the government at the Bar.

He became a Deputy High Court Judge in 2004. In 2006, he took silk, continuing to act as First Treasury Counsel Common Law until his appointment to the High Court, Chancery Division in 2008. He was appointed to the Court of Appeal in 2014.

He has also been a member of the Competition Appeal Tribunal, Vice-President of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal and Deputy Chair of the Boundary Commission for England.

Lord Reed, President of the Court, said: ‘Lord Sales is recognised around the world as an outstanding judge.’

Lord Sales will be sworn in as Deputy President in January 2026. 

Issue: 8137 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , In Court
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll