Clause 64 - Power to alter judicial titles
Courts Bill [Lords]
9:45 am
Mr Christopher Leslie (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs; Shipley, Labour)
As the hon. Gentleman has said, the amendment would expressly require the Lord Chancellor to ''have regard to . . . recommendations'' of the heads of division following consultation with them before exercising his order-making power to amend judicial titles in England and Wales. Amendment No. 100 deals with the Northern Ireland situation.
I am advised that the amendment is unnecessary. As a matter of public law, there is an express statutory requirement to consult. It follows that the Lord Chancellor must already take the results of that consultation into account before making his decision—in this case, before making the relevant order. A number of judicial decisions have shown what is required where there is a requirement to consult, and they make it clear that the decision maker must take account of the results of the consultation. Otherwise, his or her decision may be open to challenge.
Hon. Members will clearly recall the comments of Lord Justice Simon Brown in the case of Regina v. Devon county council ex parte Baker in 1995. Drawing from earlier authorities, he described the request for consultation as including,
''that the product of consultation must be conscientiously taken into account in finalising any . . . proposals.''
Notwithstanding that clear legal position, I assure the Committee that the Lord Chancellor will take into account the views of the heads of division in respect of any amendments to judicial titles in England and Wales. The Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland will do so in the case of amendments to judicial titles in Northern Ireland, before making orders under the sections. That matter is enshrined in general principle and I am happy to confirm it explicitly in respect of the power to alter judicial titles. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw his amendment.