Moving on up - the realities of the journey from Bar to bench
As the only High Court appointee from a five-strong round this year to already carry a judicial title, Judge Henry Globe QC marks the exception rather than the rule. Called to the Bar at Middle Temple in 1972, Globe started out like most, working with his set, Exchange Chambers, and practising as a junior counsel on the local circuit. Now, having been a circuit judge for the past eight years, Globe is joining the select few who make it as far as the High Court.
September 21, 2011 at 07:03 PM
8 minute read
With five new judges joining the High Court this September, Suzanna Ring looks at what the move from Bar to bench means for one recruit
As the only High Court appointee from a five-strong round this year to already carry a judicial title, Judge Henry Globe QC marks the exception rather than the rule.
Called to the Bar at Middle Temple in 1972, Globe started out like most, working with his set, Exchange Chambers, and practising as a junior counsel on the local circuit. Now, having been a circuit judge for the past eight years, Globe is joining the select few who make it as far as the High Court.
"My pupil master had a common law practice spread between criminal, family and personal injury work and so my training focused on these three disciplines, which was quite a common feature at the Bar when I joined in the 1970s. For a number of years, I practised in these three areas, but as I became more senior I acquired an interest in children's cases and larger criminal casework," says Globe.
Appointed Queens Counsel (QC) in 1994, Globe saw his practice develop to become "exclusively criminal", before taking up a role as joint head of his set from 2000-03. It was at this point that he became a full-time circuit judge for the courts of Liverpool, which within seven months had turned into an appointment as the Honorary Recorder of Liverpool, a position that he has held for the last eight years.
Acting on a number of high-profile cases to date, including an instruction as junior prosecuting counsel on the James Bulger trial and as leading prosecuting counsel for former Southampton football manager David Jones on unfounded sex charges, Globe has certainly made his mark – so why has he now decided to make the move to the High Court?
For one, the move will see Globe tackle more serious cases and return to handling civil work alongside criminal, as well as, of course, marking his next step on the upwards trajectory of the English court system.
The reality
Globe is hoping that his time already spent on the bench will help him adjust to the life of the High Court, with the change in lifestyle unlikely to be as acutely felt as it may be by some of his peers.
"If you're coming from the Bar, you are coming from a practice where you are self-employed and deal with your own work. Your job is not as structured as on the bench at any level. On the bench, you need to be available to be in court on a day-by-day basis to deal with all work that is listed before you," he says.
One person that can shed some light on the realities of the role is Mrs Justice Eleanor King (pictured), who was appointed to the Family Division of the High Court in 2008.
"I have found my first three years as a High Court judge to be very fulfilling. The first year felt very strange as, even having sat as a deputy, being a 'full timer' is very different, not least the more structured life of being at court all day, five days a week; you can no longer go shopping or nip home if you finish in court early.
"This is, however, made up for by the freer weekends and having holidays when you are not spending most of the time preparing work for when you get back," says King.
Called to the Bar at Inner Temple in 1979, King was an Assistant Recorder from 1996 to 2000. She took silk in 1999 and was appointed as a deputy High Court judge and recorder in 2000, before becoming a full-time High Court judge in 2008.
When asked about the best part of the job, she says: "Not having to win anymore. I like being neutral and deciding the case without having to fight anyone's corner.
"The other thing I really enjoy is the collegiate feel of the division. Not only is it companionable, but it is similar to chambers or a firm in that there is always someone with whom to discuss things. This more than compensates for the fact that colleagues sometimes eat my biscuits!"
While most wait until the latter days of their career to move across from the Bar to the judiciary, it seems there is something to be said for the change in lifestyle that goes with the move, which perhaps might encourage others to consider it sooner. "I have reclaimed my weekends. Although I work long hours during the week I rarely work at the weekends. There is a considerable and unremitting responsibility, but far less day-to-day pressure," King muses.
So as the five new recruits prepare to brave the doors of the Royal Courts of Justice this autumn, what advice does King have?
"Try not to reserve too many judgments. In the early days it is very tempting to reserve judgments in order to be sure to get it right and to make it read as well as possible. What you need to realise is that the cases don't stop coming while you are thinking about the case before and polishing your prose.
"Nine out of 10 litigants just want to know your decision and to get on with their lives, so be prepared to take a deep breath and give an extemporary judgment."
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
The entry point
As one of the senior courts of England and Wales, the High Court has often been the point of entry into the judiciary for senior barristers.
Based in the City landmark, the Royal Courts of Justice (RCJ), the High Court is divided into three main divisions: the Queen's Bench Division (QBD), the Chancery Division and the Family Division, with each new judge assigned to one of the three. Candidates put themselves forward for the High Court through an application process requiring a number of references from nominated referees.
If short-listed, the candidate is interviewed by a panel consisting of three to five members including a chair, judicial member and an independent member. Candidates are asked questions relating to the demands of being a High Court judge, their practice and, if relevant, their time already spent on the bench.
Successful applicants must commit to a minimum of five years in the High Court, with appointments only available when a current judge either steps down or is elevated to the Court of Appeal. There are 108 statutory High Court judges.
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
The other four judges joining the high court
Queens Bench Division appointments
- Rabinder Singh QC, Matrix Chambers
Called to the Bar: 1989
Silk: 2002
Profile: First Sikh judge to be appointed to the High Court. Singh specialises in public, employment and human rights law. He has appeared in more than 35 cases in the House of Lords or Supreme Court.
- Andrew Popplewell QC, Brick Court Chambers
Called to the Bar: 1981
Silk: 1997
Profile: Specialises in commercial disputes covering insurance and reinsurance, banking and finance, international trade, shipping, energy, civil fraud, financial services, arbitration and professional negligence. He has acted for high-profile clients including Roman Abramovich, Citibank and HSBC.
- Charles Haddon-Cave QC, Quadrant Chambers
Called to the Bar: 1978
Silk: 1999
Profile: Specialises in aviation, shipping, international arbitration and disaster litigation. He has acted on some of the largest aviation and marine cases in England, including the 1987 Herald of Free Enterprise ferry disaster and the 1995 Kegworth Aircrash. He is the current chair of the Advocacy Training Council of the Bar of England & Wales (since 2007).
Chancery division appointments
- Robert Hildyard QC, 4 Stone Buildings
Called to the Bar: 1977
Silk: 1994
Profile: Specialises in company and commercial law including M&A, corporate insolvency and financial services. He became a deputy High Court judge in 2001 and has been the Attorney General to the Duchy of Lancaster since 2006.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInternational Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readThe Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Calculated Push Into Law Firms
5 minute read'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250