Background
286.Eligibility for appointment to professional judicial office in England and Wales is currently dependent upon applicants possessing particular qualifications (within the meaning of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990), which are based on possession of “rights of audience” for a prescribed number of years. The precise category of rights of audience required, and the length of time for which they must have been held, vary according to the judicial office concerned. However, the practical effect of the current arrangements is to restrict eligibility for almost all judicial posts to persons who have been qualified as barristers or solicitors in England and Wales for at least seven years (or, for some posts, 10 years). (Barristers, advocates and solicitors who have been qualified in Scotland or Northern Ireland for the required number of years are also eligible for some posts, notably in those tribunals which exercise UK-wide jurisdiction).
287.A consultation paper, Increasing Diversity in the Judiciary, published by the Department for Constitutional Affairs (now the Ministry of Justice) in October 2004, invited views as to whether these statutory eligibility requirements constituted an obstacle to greater diversity in the judiciary. Responses to consultation indicated that the eligibility requirements were considered an obstacle to greater diversity in several respects. First, because they depended on possession of rights of audience before the courts, they helped to foster the (inaccurate) perception that advocacy experience was a requirement for judicial appointment, deterring eligible individuals from applying. Second, they excluded entirely members of certain legal professional groups (for example, legal executives) who might possess the skills, knowledge and experience needed to perform well in judicial office, and who also tended to be drawn from a wider range of backgrounds than barristers and solicitors. It was also argued that the existing requirements were unsatisfactory in that someone who qualified as a barrister or a solicitor but who then did no more legal work of any kind still became eligible for judicial appointment on the seventh anniversary of their qualification. Finally, respondents considered that the periods of time for which a qualification must have been held were too long, disadvantaging those who had joined the profession later in life but whose career paths might nevertheless render them fitted for consideration.
288.The provisions in this Part of the Act seek to address these concerns by removing the existing link between eligibility for judicial appointment and possession of advocacy rights; by providing for the extension of eligibility for some appropriate appointments to holders of legal qualifications other than barristers and solicitors; by introducing a requirement that a person with a relevant qualification must also have gained legal experience to be eligible for office; and by reducing the number of years for which it is necessary to have held the relevant qualification and gained legal experience. It is to be noted that these changes attach to the eligibility threshold for appointment. The aim is to increase the pool of those eligible for office, but the current system of merit-based appointment will remain. These changes apply to offices under provisions amended by Schedule 10 to the Act, which includes a wide range of judicial offices in both mainstream courts and tribunals.
