Three judges appointed to Supreme Court bench By Katy Dowell 26 February 2013 12:03 17 December 2015 14:31 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 12:27 Never mind the absence of a female appointment, far more important is the absence of any new Chancery blood to replace Walker. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 12:38 disappointing not to see Patrick Elias up there. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 13:21 @ Anonymous, 12.27pm Lord Hodge is the Exchequer Judge in the Court of Session and has expertise in matters relating to customs and excise, revenue, stamp duty and probate. That might go some small way towards filling the Walker void. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 13:36 It had been mooted that Lord Hodge having missed out on the top two jobs in Scotland recently, would be headed south. As someone who has spent more hours than I care to recall in recent years in his court -Commnercial court, not IP as suggested, there is no specific IP court in the Court of Session – he is a more than able candidate to take over from David Hope. And for those who will appear before him, they will find him courteous, not without humour and possessed of a keen mind. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 15:18 Why not appoint Dame Mary Arden? This is very disappoimting. She is easily the best qualified for the job, and had chnacery expertise as well as having chaired the Law Commission. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 15:40 Yet again a sad indictment of our profession that our excellent women judges are not seen as adequate candidates for our Supreme Court – anyone care to examine that glass ceiling? Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 15:40 Re: Anon at 3.18 – Arden’s real problem is that she is married to Lord Mance; the UKSC would look even more like a cosy club. The diversity thing is overblown – we need to be looking at why, for example, there should be a NI judge – the selection pool there is tiny and, once you are a NI Appeal Court judge, you effectively have a 1 in 3 chance of making it to the UKSC. When was there last a NI appeal of substance, requiring specific expertise of NI law? Hale has already starting trailing nonsense about a Welsh judge. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 18:27 Re: Anon@3:18pm – I understand from the legal grapevine that Arden has applied at least once before (unsuccessfully, obviously), so (assuming she applied again) must have been unlikely to succeed this time. If that is so, precisely who are the women judges whom Anon@3:40(1) think were better qualified for these vacancies than Hughes, Toulson and Hodge? Good things have been said about Black LJ, but there is no need for another SCJ with a family law background. Both Hale and Wilson are ex-Family Division judges; while Hughes is too, his background was largely in criminal law and this appointment brings extremely valuable expertise to a Court that lacks really deep experience in that field. Toulson is an outstandingly good judge who will be a real asset to the SC across all fields. As for Hale’s suggestion of a “Welsh judge”, we must first define what that curious term means. Given that there is no “Welsh law” [sic] jurisdiction at present (and there will not be one for some time, judging by the results of the recent consultation on this issue) and thus no “Welsh judges”, it is right to describe this suggestion as utter nonsense. While Kerr is very good, I agree with Anon@3:40(2) about it being completely wrong for the NICA judges to have a 1 in 3 chance of appointment each time the NI SCJ retires. Reply Link Anonymous 26 February 2013 at 18:43 Lord Hodge is a wonderful Judge. He will be missed by all of the Scottish Bar. He is clever, always courteous and very poular. Scotland misses out. Reply Link Anonymous 27 February 2013 at 12:50 Another problem with Arden is that she is very biased in favour of HMRC. I cannot recall her deciding a tax case in the taxpayer’s favour. Reply Link Anon 28 February 2013 at 10:12 How many suitably qualified women applied? But then again, why let the facts get in the way of the argument that there *must* be more women judges. Reply Link Anonymous 28 February 2013 at 11:13 I find it annoying that people set so much store in the apparently automatic “benefits” of diversity. I’d rather have a panel of judges that are intelligent and picked on their academic merits, than judges who are picked because they introduce diversity. Baroness Hale is a perfect example of the fact that there can be diversity, but it’s for the minorities to instigate it by reaching the necessary standards, and it is for the employees or selection bodies to not fetter their discretion on grounds of race, gender, beliefs, etc. Diversity should not be an end, nor a means to an end. The end should be judicial excellence, not affected by irrelevant factors such as gender or race, and not as a result of fettered discretion. I’m interested to see how these new judges fare. Reply Link Anonymous 28 February 2013 at 12:28 Absurd comment. Common sense has nothing to do with gender. You either have it or don,t have it. Reply Link Anonymous 1 March 2013 at 13:12 “Anonymous | 27-Feb-2013 12:50 pm” “Another problem with Arden is that she is very biased in favour of HMRC. I cannot recall her deciding a tax case in the taxpayer’s favour.” This cannot be a reason why she was not appointed if she applied. I haven’t come across many of her judgments in tax cases, but I am sure that she had her reasons to decide the cases the way she decided them. Also, do not forget that she’s not alone. There are another two judges in deciding the case who probably agreed with her in ruling in favour of the HMRC. Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.