November 5, 2007
Frances Gibb, Legal Editor
Jack Straw has ditched controversial reforms that would have allowed judges, including former Lord Chancellors, to return to work as lawyers after a stint on the bench.
The plans, put forward by Mr Straw’s predecessor, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, were aimed at making the job of a judge more attractive – particularly to women.
But they ran into strong opposition from judges, with the Lord Chief Justice earlier this year condemning the plans as unworkable, possibly unlawful, counterproductive and damaging to judicial independence.
Instead of creating a more diverse judiciary, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Britain’s most senior judge, said the plans would expose judges to accusations of bias and damage the public view of them as independent and impartial.
By convention, becoming a judge is a one way-ticket: lawyers exchange a lucrative but less predictable life at the Bar or, occasionally, in a law firm for a fixed salary, a pension and, on the High Court bench, a knighthood.
But Lord Falconer was determined to relax the rules to encourage younger applicants, particularly women, who might be deterred by the prospect of spending the rest of their working career in a job that might not fit with family commitments.
The lifting of the restriction would have even allowed future Lord Chancellors who had sat as judges to become lawyers again.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton, however, always insisted that the move would not and could not apply to him as he himself had appointed judges and could not then go back to appearing before them.
This morning Mr Straw, the Justice Secretary, said that he did not believe the steps would help increase racial and gender diversity among the judiciary.
“The Government consulted widely, considering the arguments both for and against allowing former salaried judges to return to practice,” Mr Straw said.
The announcement means the existing set-up, whereby judicial appointments are made for life, will remain in force although if a judge decides to abandon his career – as Mr Justice Laddie did two years ago – they cannot be stopped.
A consultation paper published last September said the proposed changes would apply to judges who had served “at any level”.
The original proposals said lawyers who had left the judiciary may even have been allowed to advertise themselves as “ex-judges”.
The paper set out a range of possible safeguards designed to prevent favouritism or conflicts of interest, such as a two-year “quarantine period” before they could accept jobs with any law firm which appeared before them as a judge.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2810884.ece?Submitted=true
Comment by Alfred Donovan
The Shell Smart trial in June and July 1999
This website and sisters royaldutchshellplc.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, and shellnews.net, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.This was High Court litigation in which my son John Donovan was the plaintiff and I was a defendant in a Counterclaim brought by Shell.
In May 2004, I wrote to the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, complaining that the trial Judge, Mr Justice Laddie as he then was, had failed to disclose a connection with Tom Moody-Stuart, the barrister son of Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, the Group Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell at the time of the litigation. There was personal animosity between us and the Moody-Stuart family which culminated in correspondence with Lady Judy Moody-Stuart initiated by her. In my letter to Lord Falconer I alleged that the Judge displayed a blatant bias in favour of Shell. By coincidence or otherwise the Judge resigned in 2005 and joined an IT law firm which for some years has claimed Shell as a client. We discovered that Professor Sir Hugh Laddie, as he is now known, has been a long term friend of Tony Willoughby, senior partner at Willoughby & Partners/Rouse Legal. This was another Shell related connection undisclosed at the time of the trial.
The letter to Lord Falconer
http://www.shellnews.net/2004%20Documents/letters/aedlettertolordfalconer20may2004.htm
Royal Dutch Shell conspired directly with Hitler, financed the Nazi Party, was anti-Semitic and sold out its own Dutch Jewish employees to the Nazis. Shell had a close relationship with the Nazis during and after the reign of Sir Henri Deterding, an ardent Nazi, and the founder and decades long leader of the Royal Dutch Shell Group. His burial ceremony, which had all the trappings of a state funeral, was held at his private estate in Mecklenburg, Germany. The spectacle (photographs below) included a funeral procession led by a horse drawn funeral hearse with senior Nazis officials and senior Royal Dutch Shell directors in attendance, Nazi salutes at the graveside, swastika banners on display and wreaths and personal tributes from Adolf Hitler and Reichsmarschall, Hermann Goring. Deterding was an honored associate and supporter of Hitler and a personal friend of Goring.
Deterding was the guest of Hitler during a four day summit meeting at Berchtesgaden. Sir Henri and Hitler both had ambitions on Russian oil fields. Only an honored personal guest would be rewarded with a private four day meeting at Hitler’s mountain top retreat.
IN JULY 2007, MR BILL CAMPBELL (ABOVE, A RETIRED GROUP AUDITOR OF SHELL INTERNATIONAL SENT AN EMAIL TO EVERY UK MP AND MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS: 
MORE DETAILS:
A head-cut image of Alfred Donovan (now deceased) appears courtesy of The Wall Street Journal.
