The Law Society last week called on the government to reinforce the independence of its proposed judicial appointments commission and supreme court and joined the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in calling for the QC system to be scrapped.

Replying to the government consultations on the three issues, which close on 7 November, the Society called for members of the commission to be appointed after open competition and impartial interviewing.

On the supreme court, Chancery Lane recommended appointments be made by a special commission.

Where its recommendations are rejected by government, the relevant minister should give reasons, the response said.

It recommended that serving supreme court judges should not sit in the House of Lords, but retired judges be appointed to the upper house so it retains the benefit of 'non-partisan legal expertise'.

The Society maintained the QC system should be abolished as a Crown appointment, 'as it serves no useful public interest and can act as a distortion of the market.' It does favour an accreditation scheme run by the profession.

In its reply, the OFT said the QC title is too generic to be useful, and - as it is not subject to review - it is not possible to judge whether the system encourages excellence.

Meanwhile, the Bar Council has sent its draft responses to the consultation - calling for the Crown to continue appointing QCs - to the heads of all barristers' chambers for feedback.

Jeremy Fleming