header-logo header-logo

21 June 2024 / John Gould
Categories: Opinion , Rule of law
printer mail-detail

Spot the judge

177934
By diluting the judicial title, we risk interfering with the administration of justice, argues John Gould

Until it was abolished by the Crime and Courts Act 2013, scandalising the judiciary was a criminal offence intended to maintain public confidence in judges and the administration of justice. Public confidence is not to be taken for granted. Research published in 2019 by the Sentencing Council suggested that only around half of people surveyed thought that the criminal justice system was effective or fair. Judges are sometimes subjected to unconstitutional and unwarranted attack, such as the notorious newspaper headline describing three judges as ‘enemies of the people’ in 2016, but a more subtle undermining of the special perception of judges may be developing, arising from the presentation of individuals as ‘judges’ who are not.

It has long been accepted that for the administration of justice to operate successfully, the right to use the title ‘solicitor’ or ‘barrister’ must only be used by people who are actually solicitors or barristers. It is, for example, an offence under s

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
back-to-top-scroll