Supreme Court Appointments: Sumption and Wilson officially confirmed
04 Wednesday May 2011
UKSC Blog News Articles
Share it
They were discussed on this blog on 24 March 2011 and now the appointments of Jonathan Sumption QC and Sir Nicholas Wilson as Justice of the Supreme Court (replacing Lords Saville and Collins) have finally been officially confirmed. The announcement comes in the form of an official Press Notice on the 10 Downing Street website. The Press Notice says
The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of the Right Honourable Sir Nicholas Allan Roy Wilson as a Justice of the Supreme Court with effect from 26 May 2011 following the retirement of The Right Honourable The Lord Saville of Newdigate in October 2010.
The Queen has also been pleased to approve the appointment of Jonathan Philip Chadwick Sumption OBE, QC as a Justice of the Supreme Court following the retirement of Lord Collins of Mapesbury in May 2011 with effect from a date to be agreed with the President of the Court”.
The Press Notice notes that Jonathan Sumption OBE, QC “will take up the appointment as soon as his existing professional commitments are completed, on a date to be agreed with the President of the Supreme Court” and that Lord Collins will continue to sit as an additional judge of the court.
The following (traditionally bland) “biographical details” are given:
“Lord Justice Nicholas Allan Roy Wilson (65) was called to the Bar (Inner Temple) in 1967 and took Silk in 1987. He was appointed as a Recorder in 1987 and was made a Bencher in 1993. He was appointed to the High Court (Family Division) in 1993 and to the Court of Appeal in 2005. Lord Justice Wilson was knighted in 1993.
Jonathan Philip Chadwick Sumption OBE, QC (62) was called to the Bar (Inner Temple) in 1975 and took Silk in 1986. He was appointed as a Deputy High Court Judge in 1992 and served as a Recorder between 1993 and 2001. He was then appointed as a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey in 1995″.
6 comments
Jailhouselawyer said:
04/05/2011 at 15:52
At a time when the UK is attacking the legitimacy of the highest court in Europe, the European Court of Human Rights. One of the accusations being that some of the judges lack prior judicial experience. The UK appoints a lawyer with no prior judicial experience to the highest court in the UK, the United Kingdom Supreme Court!
Why?
It exposes hypocrisy of the highest order. It means that the UK’s criticism of the ECtHR is unjustified. It leaves a taste in the mouth that this is a political appointment. Is the UK so short of judges with the necessary judicial experience for the UKSC that it has to appoint a lawyer who has no judicial experience whatsoever over qualified judges?
Gypsum fantastic said:
05/05/2011 at 17:26
Erm, if you scroll up a few inches you’ll see in Johnathan Sumption’s biographical details that he was appointed as a Deputy High Court Judge and he served as a Recorder for 8 years.
Don’t quite see how that counts as ‘no judicial experience’.
Thank you for your great contribution to the debate.
Jamie G said:
05/05/2011 at 23:03
Can you read? Sumption is a judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey and has sat as a deputy High Court judge. He clearly does have judicial experience. He has not been a full-time judge, but that is not the same thing. Other countries do this fairly commonly – eg Justice Callinan, formerly of the High Court of Australia and appointed directly from the bar; Justice Kagan, of the Supreme Court of the United States and Solicitor-General before her appointment.
The political appointment comment is just ridiculous. There is no suggestion of this whatsoever!
Michael Robinson said:
17/05/2011 at 00:58
One can only hope that, given LJ Wilson’s acceptance of the guidance in Payne v Payne being ‘controversial’, he might nudge Sir Nicholas Wall to allow the precedent to be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
Can experts from 50 countries, 85% of the legal profession and Sir Nicholas Mostyn all be wrong?
Michael Robinson http://www.relocationcampaign.co.uk