4.1

Queen's Counsel (sometimes known as 'silks') are appointed by The Queen on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor. The rank of Queen's Counsel is essentially a mark of distinction as an advocate, that is a lawyer who appears regularly in the courts who has proved to be a leading member of the profession. New Queen's Counsel are announced on Maundy Thursday and are traditionally appointed on the first day of the Easter Legal Term.

4.2

The Lord Chancellor remains accountable to Parliament for the procedure for the appointment of Queen's Counsel. That procedure has continued to develop to ensure that it is open, fair and accountable. It remains the goal of the Lord Chancellor to have available to him the best advice based on the views, fairly and frankly expressed and efficiently and accurately gathered, of the consultation community; and to ensure that individual applicants are treated equally, on their own merits alone.

4.3

Applicants are required to pay an application fee. This was introduced following the Access to Justice Act 1999 in order to remove the element of public subsidy which had previously existed. The fee was initially set at £335. There is statutory authority to review the level of this fee.

4.4

To be eligible for appointment as Queen's Counsel an applicant:

• Back to top

Selection Criteria

4.5

The Lord Chancellor only recommends for appointment as Queen's Counsel those practitioners, regardless of sex, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, professional background or any other factor, who display the following attributes to a degree which marks them out as leaders of the profession:

Advocacy:

Legal ability and practice:

1. sound intellectual ability and a thorough, comprehensive and up to date knowledge of law and procedures in the applicant's field of practice; and
2. a large and high quality practice based on demanding cases.

Professional qualities:

1. integrity, having:

   a history of honesty, discretion and plain-dealing with professional colleagues, lay and professional clients and the courts;

   independence of mind and moral courage; and

   the trust and confidence of others.

2. professional standing:

   having the respect of the Bench and of the profession in observing the advocate's duty to the Court and to the administration of justice, while presenting their client's case; and

   being formidable, fair and honourable as an opponent.

3. maturity of judgement and balance.

4.6

In order to assess whether an applicant fulfils these criteria to the required level of distinction, the Lord Chancellor consults widely among the judiciary and the legal profession. In 2000/2001, he consulted over 450 individuals and organisations, and received over 4,700 comments on the field of applicants. In order to ensure that consultees use a consistent basis for their assessment of applicants and in order to focus their views on the candidates, a classification system is used. This is in addition to providing substantive comments on each individual. For appointments in 2001 the following classification system was used:

4.7

Of the 456 applicants, 77 were successful. For detailed statistics, including comparisons with previous years, see the table below. In addition to the appointments shown in the table, Harriet Harman MP was granted Queen's Counsel following the General Election on her appointment as Solicitor General.

• Back to top

Feedback

4.8

As with judicial appointments competitions, unsuccessful Queen's Counsel applicants are encouraged to receive feedback on their applications from senior officials in Judicial Group. These feedback sessions provide an opportunity for the applicant to learn of the results of consultation on their application and whether there were any particular matters which may have contributed to their lack of success and to discuss any concerns they may have about the appointments process. Applicants will not be told which consultees made particular comments - in common with most appointment systems - but will be told the classifications they received and will be told the substance of what was said about them by the consultees.

4.9

These feedback sessions continue to be popular with unsuccessful applicants. In the 1999/2000 competition, 428 applicants were unsuccessful. Of these, 204 requested and were given feedback on their application (192 by appointment on the telephone and 12 in person).

4.10

In the 2000/2001 competition, 379 applicants were unsuccessful. As at 20 June 2001, 181 had requested feedback, of which 135 had already taken place, 130 on the telephone and 5 in person.

• Back to top

Developments

4.11

As mentioned in last year's Annual Report, following a recommendation made by Sir Leonard Peach in his scrutiny of the judicial appointments and Queen's Counsel selection procedures, the assessment form for consultees used in the 2001 competition was restructured in order to provide more information about the criteria and to seek insight into how the consultee had formed his or her views. More space was also made available for consultees to record their views. This has benefited nominated consultees who are usually consulted on a smaller number of applicants than are 'automatic' consultees. They tend to provide a very full assessment. In common with judicial appointments (paragraph 1.25), applicants were invited to name between three and six nominated consultees who did not already feature on the list of automatic consultees.

Sir Leonard Peach recommended that there should be a reserve power for applicants to be called in for a meeting in order to elaborate his or her case. Sir Leonard envisaged that he had reduced the need for such meetings by proposing a self-assessment section in the application form. It is of course the case now that officials could invite applicants in for a meeting where in exceptional circumstances it is believed that this was required in order to determine finally his or her suitability. It is also open to officials to write to applicants requesting further information or clarification, or to speak to them on the telephone. Further, the guide for applicants for the 2002 competition, clarifies the way in which the self-assessment section of the application form may be used. Applicants should find that the guide encourages them to use the self-assessment section to paint a fuller picture of themselves and their practice. Better use of the self-assessment section in this way should further reduce the need for applicants to be called in for a meeting.

4.12

4.13

As mentioned earlier (paragraph 2.3) Sir Colin Campbell was appointed the First Commissioner for Judicial Appointments in March 2001. As with candidates for judicial appointments, the First Commissioner has the power to investigate complaints of discrimination, unfairness or maladministration in the Queen's Counsel appointment system. The contact details for the First Commissioner are in Annex I.

4.14

In March 2001, the Director General of Fair Trading, in his report on Competition in the Professions, (OFT Report) considered the Queen's Counsel system. The Lord Chancellor has said that it is absolutely right that the system should be critically examined. In response to the OFT Report, the Government has said that it will issue a consultation paper inviting comments. The results of this consultation in relation to the Queen's Counsel system will be outlined in the next Annual Report.

• Back to top

Honorary Queen's Counsel

4.15

Separately, the Lord Chancellor recommends to Her Majesty The Queen the award of Queen's Counsel honoris causa ('honorary Queen's Counsel' or 'honorary silk') to those who have made an exceptionally distinguished contribution to the law in England and Wales or the Commonwealth outside the field of advocacy. Those considered for the award include academic lawyers, lawyers in the public service and employed lawyers. This year, the Lord Chancellor recommended the award to Donald Harris and Professor Alfred Simpson.

4.16

The following table gives statistical information about this and previous years' competitions. A full breakdown of applicants from this year's competition, including by age and length of practice is in Annex H.

• Back to top

Earnings

4.17

Another of Sir Leonard Peach's recommendations was that a table of fees for successful candidates should be published annually. Applicants are asked to declare their earnings for each of the previous three completed financial years. The average of these three figures is then calculated for each applicant, and these averages are analysed. The resulting chart was published for the first time last year. The second such chart was issued as part of the public announcement of the new Queen's Counsel and is reproduced below.