*/
Barristers and solicitors responding to a survey on judicial appointments have displayed a “widespread and underlying perception” of “inherent prejudice”.
The Judicial Appointments Commission (“JAC”) published research in June, commissioned from the British Market Research Bureau, showing one-third of 2,000 solicitors and barristers who responded mistakenly believed they had to know a High Court judge willing to act as a referee before they could apply for a judicial appointment.
Many respondents believed that being younger than 40 years’ old, working class, a solicitor rather than a barrister, not having the “right” kind of education and not knowing the top judges would disadvantage any application.JAC Chair Baroness Prashar said the results provided a “sound basis for future work”, and that the JAC would continue working “to dispel these unfounded myths and to develop an even sharper and better targeted approach to encourage applicants from a much more diverse pool”.
The JAC will hold a conference specifically to discuss the findings of the research and how to shape attitudes to the judiciary, on 7 July, in London. Representatives from the Law Society, Bar Council, Employed Bar, Association of Women Solicitors and other legal groups will be invited.
More than half the respondents said they would consider judicial office if they could work part-time. Of those questioned, some 13 per cent of black and Asian, and seven per cent of white respondents, said they were “very likely” to apply in future. Many respondents further believed the appointments process was based solely on merit. For example, women thought men had an advantage while men thought women were favoured.
The Judicial Appointments Commission (“JAC”) published research in June, commissioned from the British Market Research Bureau, showing one-third of 2,000 solicitors and barristers who responded mistakenly believed they had to know a High Court judge willing to act as a referee before they could apply for a judicial appointment.
Many respondents believed that being younger than 40 years’ old, working class, a solicitor rather than a barrister, not having the “right” kind of education and not knowing the top judges would disadvantage any application.JAC Chair Baroness Prashar said the results provided a “sound basis for future work”, and that the JAC would continue working “to dispel these unfounded myths and to develop an even sharper and better targeted approach to encourage applicants from a much more diverse pool”.
The JAC will hold a conference specifically to discuss the findings of the research and how to shape attitudes to the judiciary, on 7 July, in London. Representatives from the Law Society, Bar Council, Employed Bar, Association of Women Solicitors and other legal groups will be invited.
More than half the respondents said they would consider judicial office if they could work part-time. Of those questioned, some 13 per cent of black and Asian, and seven per cent of white respondents, said they were “very likely” to apply in future. Many respondents further believed the appointments process was based solely on merit. For example, women thought men had an advantage while men thought women were favoured.
Barristers and solicitors responding to a survey on judicial appointments have displayed a “widespread and underlying perception” of “inherent prejudice”.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
