If the judge decides that the claimant is entitled to damages, he will have to decide the amount. Or the claimant may have asked for an injunction, or a declaration. The task of the judge to is to decide on what is the appropriate remedy, if any, and on the precise terms of it.
And then, when the judgment has been delivered, the judge must deal with the cost of the case - like the fees of lawyers, the court fees paid out by the parties, the fees of expert witnesses, earnings lost, travelling and other expenses incurred by the parties and their witnesses in getting to and from court. The general rule is that the unsuccessful party will have to pay the successful party's costs, the judge has a wide discretion to depart from this rule. The judge's decision on this part of the case will be highly crucial to the parties as it could outweigh the sum of damages that was awarded to the claimant!
There are 37 Lord Justices of Appeal, they sit in both civil and criminal divisions of the Court of Appeal. They may be against the finding of liability or an appeal about the remedy awarded – e.g. the amount of money given as damages. They usually sit as a panel of 3 to hear cases, on rare occasions in important cases there may be a panel of 5. They are referred to as Lord Justice or Lady Justice.
Discuss the disadvantages of the present judicial selection
Until 2005 the Lord Chancellor was the key figure in the selection of superior judges, they would have files containing secret information about opinions from existing judges on the suitability of each person. When there was a vacancy the Lord Chancellor would consider the information in these files and decide who was the best for the post. This system was seen as secretive and felt that it favoured white males. But from 1998 vacancies were advertised and any qualified person could apply, however the Lord Chancellor continued to invite people.
Law Lords are appointed by the Queen after being nominated by the prime minister. The first woman judge to sit as a Law Lord was appointed in January 2004.
When the new Supreme Court is established in 2009, judges will be selected according a Supreme Court selection commission. The commission will decide the selection process to be used and will use it to select a candidate and report that selection to the Lord Chancellor. Once the Chancellor has accepted the commissions nomination he then notifies the Prime Minster who must recommend to the Queen that she appoints that person.
All other judicial appointments are made by the judicial appointments commission. There are 15 members of this commission; 6 lay members, 5 judges – 3 from the court of appeal or high court plus 1 circuit judge and 1 district judge, 1 barrister, 1 solicitor, 1 magistrate, and 1 tribunal member. Appointments are made solely on merit, the commission is responsible for assessing the merit of the candidates, no candidate can be appointed unless recommended by the commission. The Lord Chancellor has limited powers in relation to each recommendation for appointment.
The powers of the Lord Chancellor have been criticised. The chairman of the commission said the system still had loopholes if anyone was determined to meddle with the merit based appointment.
Positions are advertised widely in newspapers, legal journals and online. It also runs road shows to communicate and explain the appointments system to potential applicants.
The commission has listed 5 qualities that are desirable for a good judge: intellectual capacity, integrity, independence of mind, sound judgement, decisiveness, objectivity, and willingness to learn, ability to understand and deal fairly, authority and communication skills, efficiency.
