If you fancy a job as a District Judge (Magistrates Courts) there are sixteen vacancies coming up: more details here.
There will probably be a huge over-subscription, as there has been on previous occasions. In these lean times for many lawyers the attraction of a secure government funded job paying six figures with a nice pension is obvious.
Quite a few people see the seemingly-inexorable increase in DJ numbers as part of a long-term plan to phase out JPs, but I am not so sure. Ten immediate posts plus six some time in the future doesn't exactly amount to a flood, especially as retirements continue at their usual steady rate.
If the positions will be massively over-subscribed, then the obvious sane thing to do is reduce the pay or the pension.
ReplyDeleteRemember that although this is a time of austerity, such notions don't apply to government agencies.
DeleteA lot of people applying does not equal a lot of competent people applying. While it is questionable that such a high salary is merited, its not a role which should be filled by any monkey with a vague legal background.
ReplyDeleteSorry previous comment is my mistake. 4th time lucky as I type this ....again!
ReplyDeleteI often agree with Bystander but if you say a JP sits roughly 20 days, we sit as 3, they are full time (and highly paid!) then 10 DJs must very very roughly mean the sittings of 300/400 JPs. We are told there is less work and we need fewer JPs. Why do we need more DJs and where will they go. Ours doesn't have enough to do....nice chap though he is! David
Surprised people don't understand why more DJs are being recruited and no, the additional DJs and Deputy DJs recruited in the past 5 years are far more than is necessary to replace those retiring.
ReplyDeleteFrom the advert it says:
ReplyDeleteDistrict Judges (Magistrates' Courts) sit alone in magistrates' courts, hearing cases which involve difficult points of law, evidence or procedural issues; long or inter-linked cases and those with public safety implications.
Doesn't seem to mention cases involving"celebs"!!!!! Funny that!!!!
Actually, the pool from which DJs can be recruited is not as large as you may think since it expects (in the small print) that applicants should have already sat in a fee paid judicial role. Deputy DJs are therefore the most likely to apply. So really all this is, is pushing the same old faces 'up the ladder' Having said that, i understand that a further 15 DDJs were appointed a couple of days ago...
ReplyDeleteWhatever one might think of DJ's they are judges appointed by a Royal Warrant, in otherwords HMQ and should therefore be accorded the respect that one of Her Majesty'd judges and their office demands.
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be a hard core of correspondents to this page that think that they(JPs) have some special status that entitles them to be discouteous and poisionous with their remarks to other members of the judiciary, they do not!
The reality is, it is pure self interest and introspection..
Bow St runner might be interested to know what some Senior Judges (to whom one certainly shows respect and courtesy)very privately think.And their views wouldn't be tainted by the self-interest and introspection for which he, undeservedly, accuses contributors to this blog.
ReplyDelete@Bowstreetrunner Justices of the Peace are appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor. Indeed DJ(MC) are Justices of the Peace and superior courts can and do sit as Magistrates's Courts as required. The main reason for concern over increasing DJ(MC) appointments is the question of justice. If you are charged with a criminal offence you can be tried by a bench of Magistrates(3) or a jury at the Crown Court. How is it justice for your guilt or innocence to be decided by one person?
ReplyDeleteIt is an undeniable fact that Government are seeking to abolish the Justice of the Peace system and replace by DJs. The reason is not cost reduction but simply that all salaried employees give them control whereas they have no control over JPs.
I have no problem in a 3 man/person trial bench for trials, but for guilty pleas etc there is nothing wrong with the DJ at all.
DeleteMagistrates are appointed by the Lord Chancellor on behalf, and in the name of Her Majesty (except in the Duchy of Lancashire, where they are appointed by Chancellor of the Duchy), so it is not right to say they are appointed by HMQ, unlike DJ's and other judges who must hold a personal warrant from the sovereign
DeleteAnd if there is an agenda, and I'm not saying there is - it isn't just about independence, it is because DJs can be more consistent and more quickly deployed without all the hassle some of us cause.
ReplyDeleteThat's where some of us get frustrated - oh, here we go again, all the pro-MA lobbhy will screech - at the MA never promoting how efficient we are or our plans to become more efficent with better appraisal ( not the useless BTDC box ticking done now) and mandatory training ( it isn't) - the only quality promoted is local and that won't get us far.