judiciary Flashcards
name the superior judges
- High Court Judges (high court)
- Lord Justices of Appeal (CoA)
- Justices of the Supreme Court (supreme court)
- Head of Judiciary – Lord Chief Justice
name the inferior judges
- Tribunal Judges
- Recorders - part-time judges (crown court + county court)
- District Judges (county court + magistrates’ court)
- Circuit Judges (crown court + county Court)
justices of the supreme court
- Work in the Supreme Court to hear final appeals (civil and criminal) from all courts in the uk
- Only hear cases of public importance
- Leave has to be granted to appeal to the Supreme Court
- Used to be Law Lords in the House of Lords (changed in 2009 – heard over 835 cases since then)
- Justices usually sit as a panel of 5 (although in rare circumstances can be all 12)
- Appointed by the queen on advice of the PM
- 12 positions currently (can be adjusted by the Constitutional Reform Act (2005))
- Current President = Lord Reed
- They do not wear wigs or court dress
- Any decision made becomes a precedent and binds all lower courts
lord justices of appeal
- All work is on appeals
- Sit in both civil and criminal cases in Court of Appeal
- Workload is significantly heavier than the Supreme Court
- Usually sit as a panel of 3 (can sit as 5 rarely)
- Decisions bind all lower courts
high court judges
Main function is trying civil cases at first instance (usually sit alone)
Also hear some appeals (civil and some criminal)
Some will sit in the Crown Court to hear criminal trials with a jury (will wear a wig in a criminal case)
inferior judges (circuit, recorders, district)
- Circuit judges sit in County Court and hear civil cases and the Crown Court and hear criminal cases. Sit alone. In civil cases they decide on the law and the facts and make a decision. In criminal cases they have a split function with the jury
- Recorders are part time judges and work in Crown and County Courts
- District Judges work in the County Court and Magistrates’ Court
seperation of powers - what is it?
- first put forwrd by Montesqiueu (french political theorist 18th century)
- the theory is essentially that there are three arms of government and these should be kept separate to safeguard the liberty of citizens
- each arm should check and balance the other and ideally individuals should not be a member of more than one arm
seperation of powers - three arms of government
- the executive (run the country) – Government (Prime Minister and Cabinet)
- the legislature – this is the law making arm of the state, and in the english system, this is Parliament
- the judiciary – the judges, who apply law
serperation of powers - overlap
- there is an overlap between the executive and the legislature. Ministers who form the government (executive) also sit in Parliament (legislature)
- with the exception of The Lord Chancellor (is involved in all three arms of government), there is little overlap between the judiciary adn the two other arms of the state
- The idea of the separation of powers doctrine is that each arm can check and balance the other to stop any particular arm becoming too powerful or from abusing their power
what are the five ways in which in which the judiciary can be thought of as
independent?
- Security of tenure
- Immunity from suit
- Independence from the executive
- Independence from the legislature
- Independence from the case
security of tenure
independence of the judiciary
superior judges
* cannot be dismissed by the government
- can only be removed by the Queen following a petition from both Houses of Parliament (never done for an English Judge)
- Protects judges from political whims
inferior judges
* do not have security of tenure
- Lord Chancellor (politician) can with the consent of the LCJ dismiss inferior judges for incapacity or misbehaviour
- Inferior judges are not protected in the same way
immunity from suit
- judges cannot be sued for their performance in any cases
- they also have immunity from being sued in a civil cases for actions taken/decisions made
- judges are also protected from being sued for defamation for things they say about parties/witnesses during a case
- Sirros v Moore (1975) - Crown Court Judge wrongly ordered someone’s detention – pesron made a claim of false imprisonment against the judge. CoA decided no action could be taken against the judge
independence from the executive
- superior judges cannot be dismissed by the government – therefore they can make decisions which might displease the government (judicial review)
-
Section 3 Constitutional Reform Act (2005) – guarantees judicial
independence. States that the LC and any minister with duties relating to the
judiciary MUST uphold the independence of the judiciary - also states these ministers and LC must not seek to influence decisions by judges
- Judicial Appointments Commission has also helped keep judges independent (used to be the LC (politician) who chose them).
- R (Miller) v SoS for Existing the EU (2016) – Courts held that the government must consult Parliament. Many MP’s criticised this however Theresa May publicly upheld the right of the judiciary to be independent
independence from the legislature
- judges are not involved in law-making
- full time judges are not allowed to become MP’s (recorders can)
- Before 2009 the top appeal court in the country was in the HOL and the Law Lords sat in both the legislature and the judiciary
- Separation of Powers was one of the main reasons as to why in 2009 the Supreme Court was created
independence from the case
Judges must not try any case they have an interest in
The was confirmed in Pinochet case (1998) – HOL heard an appeal from the former Head of State of Chile – Augusto Pinochet. Amnesty International were granted leave to participate in the case. After the decision to extradite him, it was discovered Lord Hoffman was an unpaid director of Amnesty Int. The lawyers challenged the case and the Law Lords ordered a retrial.
The Law Lords said there must never be a risk of bias
