Proceeding contribution from Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 14 December 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL].
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL]
The noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, is right; there is very little between what noble Lords have said. I completely accept that there is a general view that enabling people from a wider set of backgrounds to be considered is a good thing, if done appropriately, and that the Judicial Appointments Commission, led very ably by the noble Baroness, Lady Prashar, is also a good thing, and is a place where merit will be the only consideration. Those are principles upon which we are all agreed. I shall set out a little more about what we are proposing in terms of legal executives. I shall take on board what has been said as we begin to draft the regulations, and take the opportunity to talk further with the noble Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, and other noble Lords who would be interested. The existing requirements are that there are two years’ fee-paid experience before being able to apply for a salaried post. Members of ILEX will not be eligible for direct appointment to the High Court. Eligibility would be limited to the district Bench and to certain tribunals that are set out in the policy statement we produced. From there, once they had acquired the relevant qualifying experience, they would be eligible to apply for appointment to a circuit Bench, subject to the rigorous assessment processes of the JAC. Trademark attorneys and patent agents would be eligible to apply for appointments to a limited number of circuit judge and High Court judge posts, but only in the specialist patent court jurisdiction. In both cases they would have to demonstrate relevant fee-paid experience at the appropriate level, and would again be subject to assessment on the merit principle laid out by the Judicial Appointments Commission. I hope that the progress people can make is more clearly defined, and that this will give comfort to the noble Baroness. It is an important point that people can progress and gain experience. I completely take on board the point that has been made about ensuring that they are able to acquire additional qualifications or training, if required. I will make sure that is fed back into the system. I hope that gives an assurance that we are all heading in the same direction, with the right and proper safeguards. Clause 47 agreed to. Schedule 10 [Amendments relating to judicial appointments]:
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 687 c89GC
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Complaints Conditions of employment Appeals Courts Administration of justice Administration Assets Debts Cultural heritage Debt collection Certification Arrears Attachment of earnings Fees and charges Licensing Enforcement Eligibility Judiciary Exemptions Households Functions Judges Income Landlords Ownership Powers of entry Membership Public appointments Payments Museums and galleries Loans Staff Lord Chancellor's Department Non-departmental public bodies Tribunals Regulation Tenants Rents Sequestration of assets Council on Tribunals Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council
- Legislation
- Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:47:32 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365712
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365712
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_365712