Report comment

As a current ET Judge, I'm afraid I disagree that the test isn't fit for purpose (though I suppose I would say that, wouldn't I!)

The ability to read and assimilate large quantities of information swiftly is vital for "judge-craft". It can be stressful knowing that you've got very limited time to get through a case that is potentially complex and the outcome can be life-changing for the litigants. Speed-writing is another essential competence, given that you will be required to draft a judgment and deliver it at the conclusion of the hearing. Those two elements of the test are certainly reflective of the work to come.

Only if you get through the written test are you assessed on the other skills - ability to act fairly, diversity, demonstrating authority - in the role play and substantive interview, which are both thorough and thought-provoking.

While I can't speak for the Courts, and particularly the higher Courts, to which I seldom venture, it strikes me that the process is not the issue in the Tribunals. I am constantly impressed by the calibre of those entering the Tribunal judiciary. I think it is rather the post-appointment potential challenges that put off solicitors, and it's that, and not the route to entry that is the problem. I would be interested to see whether the Bar is disproportionately represented in the number of candidates for entry to the judiciary. If so, it would seem that the statistical disparity in appointments is less surprising than it appears at first blush.