Lords report proposes positive action to boost judiciary diversity
Female and minority applicants to the judiciary could be appointed ahead of white men with equal skills according to a House of Lords report published today (28 March) aimed at increasing diversity in the judiciary. The report by the House of Lords Constitution Committee suggests positive action could be one measure used to boost diversity and therefore improve public trust and confidence in the justice system.
March 27, 2012 at 07:13 PM
4 minute read
Female and minority applicants to the judiciary could be appointed ahead of white men with equal skills according to a House of Lords report published today (28 March) aimed at increasing diversity in the judiciary.
The report by the House of Lords Constitution Committee suggests positive action could be one measure used to boost diversity and therefore improve public trust and confidence in the justice system.
It proposes using section 159 of the Equalities Act 2010 for judicial appointments which would mean that while appointments must be based on merit, if everything else is equal, the desire to encourage diversity should be taken into account.
The report draws on the most recent judicial statistics which show that in 2011 only 5% of judges were from an ethnic minority and only 22% were women.
Other suggestions in the report include increasing opportunities for flexible working and career breaks to encourage applications from women, as well as the idea of the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice being given a duty to encourage diversity among the judiciary.
While the Committee has dismissed the idea of introducing targets to increase diversity, the report states this should be looked at again in five years if there has not been significant progress.
Other recommendations in the report include introducing a formal system of appraisals for judges to ensure that standards within the judiciary are maintained and increasing the retirement age for Court of Appeal and Supreme Court judges from 70 to 75 to retain talent and allow more time for women to reach the highest levels in the judiciary.
The committee has also urged the Government, the judiciary and the legal profession to encourage more judicial applications from solicitors as "being a good barrister is not necessarily the same thing as being a good judge" and suggested that the Lord Chancellor's powers to reject nominations for posts below the High Court be transferred to the Lord Chief Justice.
Committee chairman Baroness Jay said: "It is vital that the public have confidence in our judiciary. One aspect of ensuring that confidence is a more diverse judiciary that more fully reflects the wider population.
"It is important that judges are appointed on merit but the committee felt there are steps that could be taken to promote diversity without undermining that principle. It is also important that solicitors, who are a more representative group of society than barristers, do not face any impediments to a career in the judiciary."
The Government now has two months to respond to the report, at which point it will go back to the Lords for debate.
Fountain Court head Tim Dutton (pictured) said: "I think this report suggests some sensible steps to increasing diversity within the judiciary and I agree with the decision not to resort to setting targets yet. When this was attempted by the Bar some years ago it proved to be more of a hindrance than a help. It is much better to embark on creating a culture of greater awareness and inclusivity.
"The report's recommendation to appoint to correct an imbalance where two candidates are of equal merit is a good one, as it ensures that standards are maintained, but recognises the need for tangible change. I also think that the decision to raise the retirement age in the Supreme Court is sensible. Lord Collins retirement last year came too soon."
The news comes after research published by think-tank CentreForum earlier this week stated that the senior judicial appointments process in the UK was in need of "significant reform".
It recommended a move away from the present system of ad hoc appointing commissions towards an expanded senior judicial appointments commission that includes input from the senior judiciary, cross-party parliamentarians and lay members.
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
© 2024 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 AllLatAm Moves: DLA Piper Chile, Brazil’s Demarest Build Out Disputes Muscle
Kingsley Napley and Lord Pannick Spearhead Private Schools' Challenge to Government VAT Policy
Spain Loses Appeal as London Court Rejects Claim of Immunity in €101 Million Arbitral Award Enforcement
Jones Day Expands European Footprint with Global Disputes Partner in Madrid
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
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