header-logo header-logo

22 January 2016 / Brice Dickson
Issue: 7683 / Categories: Features , In Court
printer mail-detail

Reigning supreme

nlj_7683_dickson

Brice Dickson casts an eye over events at The Supreme Court in 2015

For the second year running there were no changes in the composition of the Supreme Court during 2015, though the highly respected Jenny Rowe retired as the court’s chief executive.

There continues to be just one female justice, Lady Hale, and the average age of the 12 justices has crept up to 67. There will be at least one change in 2016, as Lord Toulson must retire by September.

Cases decided

In 2015, the court delivered judgments in 79 cases, compared with 68 in 2014 and 81 in 2013. As usual, most cases (65, or 82%) were heard by five justices, but 13 were heard by seven. In one case, dealing with a costs issue, only three justices sat. No case involved nine justices. The president of the court, Lord Neuberger, presided in 60 of the 79 cases (76%) and the deputy president, Lady Hale, presided in 16 (20%). The president and deputy president sat together in 27 cases (34%). Lord Mance presided in two cases and Lord Kerr in one.

In five

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll