header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
26 November 2021 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7958 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Who would want to be a High Court judge?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
65104
Vexatious litigants, lacklustre lodgings & tight turnaround times: Dominic Regan ponders the downsides of a seat on the High Court bench

Elevation to the High Court bench sounds astonishing, doesn’t it? Well, it isn’t. A recent appointee was looking forward to getting the one reward money cannot buy—a knighthood. The curmudgeonly palace would only allow him one guest in attendance!

Talent today is the pre-requisite in order to acquire the coveted red dressing gown. Those who take up office inevitably relinquish a substantial income. They are always in demand and undertake a vast amount of work. The stipend today is £192,679, which might sound like loads to some, yet isn’t that much more than City firms are paying newly qualified youngsters.

Another revelation for my friend was Pay As You Earn. As a barrister, he was of course self-employed and collected income gross. To see thousands withheld at the source each month was a harsh introduction to the real world.

Going out on circuit and dealing with

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll