Judicial Appointments

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 185, 2 May 1940, Page 11

Judicial Appointments

Sir, >—Your correspondent “Layman” asks the question, “Is it clear that the recent judicial appointment is authorized by law?” My opinion, for what it is worth, is that the answer is clearly “No.” The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court is covered by the Judicature Act, 190 S. Section 6 of which reads as follows: “No person, other than a barrister or solicitor of not less than seven years’ standing of the Supreme Court or a barrister or advocate of not less than seven years’ standing in tiie United Kingdom shall be appointed judge.” The whole question turns on the meaning to be given to the expression “seven years’ standing.” It is submitted that “seven years’ standing” must be interpreted as being the equivalent of seven years’ practical experience as a practitioner. It is of course perfectly clear that the purpose of the section is to ensure that no person shall be appointed to the high and responsible office of judge who has not had the necessary ’practical experience for the office. That this is the correct interpretation of the word “standing” is confirmed by the similar wording of the Magistrates’ Court Amendment Act 1913, Section 2 (3) of which reads as follows: “A person shall not be appointed a magistrate unless (a) he is a barrister.or solicitor of the Supreme Court of not less than five years’ standing, or (b) be has been continuously employed as clerk of a Magistrates’ Court for a period of at least 10 years and is a barrister or solicitor.” It seems that in order to qualify for appointment to the magistrates’ bench a solicitor must either (a) have been employed continuously for 10 years as a clerk of the Magistrates’ Court, or (b) have five years’standing, that is to say, 10 years’ continuous employment as a magistrates’ clerk is regarded by the Legislature as the equivalent of five years’ actual practice. It is significant that a judge of the Arbitration Court, from whom there is no appeal, has on occasions to hear, appeals from magistrates. It is submitted, therefore, that “standing” can only be interpreted as meaning actual practice as a barrister or solicitor, the keynote of Section 6 of tiie Judicature Act being that the mere theory obtained from the passing of examinations must Ire supplemented by actual practical experience, and ibis requirement is not peculiar to the practice of tiie law. Presumably when Parliament assembles, we will again see the spectacle of legislation being introduced retrospectively to authorize an unauthorized act. —I am, etc., ANOTHER PRACTITIONER. Wellington, April 30.