Learning Outcomes
By the end of this article, you will be able to explain the main roles and responsibilities of the judiciary in England and Wales, including the principle of judicial independence, the operation of judicial precedent, and the judiciary’s duties under the Human Rights Act 1998. You will also be able to identify the structure of the judicial hierarchy and the significance of these concepts for the SQE1 exam.
SQE1 Syllabus
For SQE1, you are required to understand the roles and responsibilities of the judiciary within the legal system of England and Wales. As you revise this article, focus on:
- the principle and safeguards of judicial independence
- the structure and hierarchy of the judiciary and their functions
- the doctrine of judicial precedent and its application
- the judiciary’s responsibilities under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA)
- the importance of impartiality, accountability, and diversity in the judiciary
Test Your Knowledge
Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.
- What is meant by judicial independence, and why is it important for the legal system?
- Which part of a judgment is binding on lower courts: the ratio decidendi or the obiter dicta?
- How does the Human Rights Act 1998 affect the way judges interpret UK statutes?
- Who appoints judges in England and Wales, and what is the role of the Judicial Appointments Commission?
Introduction
The judiciary is a core branch of the legal system in England and Wales. Judges interpret and apply the law, resolve disputes, and ensure that justice is administered fairly and impartially. The judiciary’s responsibilities are shaped by constitutional principles such as judicial independence, the doctrine of precedent, and statutory duties under the Human Rights Act 1998. Understanding these roles is essential for SQE1.
The Principle of Judicial Independence
Judicial independence means that judges must be free from improper influence by the government, Parliament, or any other external body. This principle is fundamental to the rule of law and public confidence in the justice system.
Key Term: judicial independence Judicial independence is the requirement that judges are able to decide cases impartially, free from external pressure or interference.
Safeguards for Judicial Independence
Several mechanisms protect judicial independence:
- Separation of powers: Judges are separate from the executive and legislature.
- Security of tenure: Senior judges can only be removed by a special procedure involving both Houses of Parliament.
- Financial security: Judicial salaries are set independently and cannot be reduced as a means of control.
- Immunity: Judges are immune from civil liability for acts done in their judicial capacity.
- Impartial appointments: The Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) selects judges based on merit, not political considerations.
Key Term: separation of powers The separation of powers is the division of state authority among the legislature, executive, and judiciary to prevent concentration of power.
Key Term: Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) The JAC is an independent body responsible for selecting and recommending candidates for judicial office based on merit.
Why Judicial Independence Matters
Judicial independence ensures that:
- Cases are decided solely on the law and evidence.
- Judges can protect individual rights, even against the state.
- The public trusts that justice is fair and impartial.
The Judicial Hierarchy and Court Structure
The judiciary is organised in a hierarchy, with different levels of courts and judges. This structure determines the flow of appeals and the authority of judicial decisions.
Key Term: judicial hierarchy The judicial hierarchy is the ranking of courts and judges according to their authority and the types of cases they hear.
Main Levels of the Judiciary
- Supreme Court: The highest appellate court for civil and criminal cases.
- Court of Appeal: Hears appeals in civil and criminal matters from lower courts.
- High Court: Deals with complex or high-value civil cases and appeals from lower courts.
- Crown Court: Handles serious criminal cases and appeals from magistrates’ courts.
- County Court: Deals with most civil disputes.
- Magistrates’ Courts: Hear summary criminal cases and some civil matters.
Each level of judge (e.g., Justices of the Supreme Court, Lord/Lady Justices of Appeal, High Court Judges, Circuit Judges, District Judges, Magistrates) has defined powers and responsibilities.
The Doctrine of Judicial Precedent
The doctrine of precedent, or stare decisis, ensures consistency and predictability in the law. Lower courts must follow the legal principles established by higher courts in previous cases.
Key Term: judicial precedent Judicial precedent is the principle that courts are bound to follow the legal decisions of higher courts in previous similar cases.
Key Term: stare decisis Stare decisis means "to stand by things decided"—the principle that previous decisions should be followed in future cases.
How Precedent Works
- Binding precedent: Lower courts must follow the ratio decidendi (reason for the decision) of higher courts.
- Persuasive precedent: Decisions from courts of the same level, lower courts, or courts in other jurisdictions may be considered but are not binding.
- Ratio decidendi: The legal principle essential to the decision, which is binding.
- Obiter dicta: Comments or observations not essential to the decision; not binding but may be persuasive.
Key Term: ratio decidendi The ratio decidendi is the legal principle or rule on which a court’s decision is based and which is binding in future similar cases.
Key Term: obiter dicta Obiter dicta are statements in a judgment that are not essential to the decision; they are not binding but may be persuasive.
Worked Example 1.1
A High Court judge is deciding a case involving a novel point of contract law. There is a previous Court of Appeal decision on a similar issue. Must the High Court judge follow it?
Answer: Yes. The High Court is bound by decisions of the Court of Appeal on points of law unless a recognised exception applies.
Worked Example 1.2
A magistrates’ court is hearing a criminal case. The Supreme Court has previously ruled on the same legal issue. Is the magistrates’ court bound by that decision?
Answer: Yes. All lower courts must follow binding precedents set by higher courts in the judicial hierarchy.
The Human Rights Act 1998 and Judicial Duties
The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law. This statute imposes specific duties on judges.
Key Term: Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) The HRA is a statute that requires UK courts to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way that is compatible with the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights.
Judicial Responsibilities under the HRA
- Section 2: Courts must take into account decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, though they are not strictly binding.
- Section 3: Courts must interpret UK statutes, as far as possible, to be compatible with ECHR rights.
- Section 4: If a statute cannot be interpreted compatibly, higher courts may issue a declaration of incompatibility, signalling to Parliament that the law conflicts with the ECHR.
- Section 6: It is unlawful for courts (as public authorities) to act incompatibly with ECHR rights unless required by primary legislation.
Worked Example 1.3
A judge is asked to apply a UK statute that appears to conflict with the right to a fair trial under the ECHR. What must the judge do under the HRA?
Answer: The judge must interpret the statute, as far as possible, to be compatible with the ECHR. If this is not possible, the judge may issue a declaration of incompatibility.
Exam Warning
If a statute is clear and cannot be interpreted compatibly with the ECHR, the court must apply the statute but may issue a declaration of incompatibility. This does not invalidate the law, but signals to Parliament that change may be needed.
Judicial Accountability and Diversity
Judges are accountable through transparent appointment processes, published judgments, and the possibility of appeal. The Judicial Appointments Commission promotes diversity and merit-based selection, aiming for a judiciary that reflects society.
Revision Tip
For SQE1, focus on the structure of the judicial hierarchy, the meaning of judicial independence, the essentials of precedent, and the main duties of judges under the HRA.
Key Point Checklist
This article has covered the following key knowledge points:
- The judiciary interprets and applies the law, resolves disputes, and ensures justice is delivered impartially.
- Judicial independence is protected by the separation of powers, security of tenure, financial security, and impartial appointments.
- The judicial hierarchy determines the authority of courts and the flow of appeals and precedent.
- The doctrine of precedent requires lower courts to follow binding decisions of higher courts; ratio decidendi is binding, obiter dicta is persuasive.
- The Human Rights Act 1998 requires judges to interpret UK law compatibly with ECHR rights and to consider Strasbourg case law.
- Judges are appointed on merit by the Judicial Appointments Commission, which also promotes diversity and transparency.
Key Terms and Concepts
- judicial independence
- separation of powers
- Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC)
- judicial hierarchy
- judicial precedent
- stare decisis
- ratio decidendi
- obiter dicta
- Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA)
