REFORMS: judges united on need for 'corporate independence' and protection from Whitehall

Half of the 12 sitting Law Lords oppose the establishment of a supreme court, arguing that the proposed change is 'unnecessary and will be harmful'.

In their response to the government consultation, Lords Nicholls, Hoffmann, Hope, Hutton, Millett and Rodger said the present arrangement works well and that the Law Lords' presence in Parliament benefits them, the House, and litigants.

They said the House of Lords, as a judicial body, has a fine reputation around the world, and said 'these real advantages need not be, and should not be, put in jeopardy'.

However, Lords Bingham (the senior Law Lord), Steyn, Saville and Walker said the functional separation of the judiciary at all levels from the legislature and executive is 'a cardinal feature of a modern, liberal, democratic state governed by the rule of law'.

The Law Lords were unanimous in calling for proper resourcing for a supreme court and said it should enjoy 'corporate independence', settling its budget in a manner which protects it from political pressure.

The Law Lords also expressed their 'very great' concern that the 'important constitutional values which the office of Lord Chancellor protected should continue to be effectively protected' once the office is abolished.

They said the constitution would be 'gravely weakened' if the Lord Chancellor's role in upholding constitutional propriety and championing judicial independence were removed and not replaced.

The Judges Council will issue its responses to the government consultations on the supreme court, judicial appointments commission and QCs later this week.

Speaking at last week's London Solicitors Litigation Association conference on the courts, Lord Justice Mance said the position of Lord Chancellor was a useful conduit by which the views of the judiciary could be transmitted to the government.

He said abolition of the role would create a risk of 'polarisation' between the executive and the judiciary, adding that the partnership between the judiciary and the executive could become unequal - 'with all the power on the side of the executive'.

Meanwhile, the 2002/3 judicial appointments annual report, released last week, has underlined the relative lack of success solicitors have when applying for judicial posts as compared to barristers.

Overall, 13.6% of solicitors applying for a judicial post were successful, as against nearly 19% of barristers.

Female solicitors were more successful than men - 17% compared with 12%.

The Lord Chancellor has decided to use assessment centres for future deputy district judge competitions after pilot centres appeared to work well, especially in encouraging women and ethnic minority lawyers to apply and be successful.