GOVERNMENT HOUSE
HONG KONG
Ref:
CR 1/1749/53 II
No.
71
Original at:
Re 209//04
This Copy for :
Inic en only/Action on
Para(s)
Sir,
21
LAST
REF.
N.XI
REF.
June, 1971.
I have the honour to refer to Sir David Trench's Despatch in this series dated the 31st of March 1971 and to your telegram No. 372 dated the 19th of May 1971 concerning the filling of vacancies for Puisne Judge.
The proposal that Mr. Morley-John should be promoted has been re-examined in conjunction with the Chief Justice in the light of your comments in the telegram. The Chief Justice admittedly does not consider that Mr. Morley-John is an ideal choice for appointment as a Puisne Judge nor that he is likely to prove to have outstanding ability in that capacity. However, in the light of experience of Mr. Morley-John's work over the last 2 years the Chief Justice felt that he was justified in modifying the view expressed by his predecessor and referred to in Despatch No. 1709 of the 13th of December 1968 that, apart from a capacity for hard work, Mr. Morley-John does not display "the other qualities that go to make a highly competent Supreme Court Judge".
Since that opinion was written in 1968, Mr. Morley-John has acted as Puisne Judge or as a Commissioner on numerous occasions with success. Indeed, his demeanour, presence and standard of work appear to improve when he is sitting on the Supreme Court Bench and the Chief Justice believes that he has shown himself to possess the necessary ability, experience and personal qualities to fill the post of Puisne Judge with reasonable and adequate competence, even if not with distinction.
Mr. D. Cons has not been afforded the same opportunities for sitting in the Supreme Court solely because he ranks fourth in order of seniority among the District Judges and, as a consequence, the three more senior Judges (Mr. Morley-John, Mr. Li and now Mr. Leonard) have filled the acting appointments available. The Chief Justice, has no reason to believe that Mr. Cons is in any way less competent than Mr. Morley-John and he has a high opinion both of Mr. Cons' capacity for hard work and his professional ability. Mr. Morley-John is now just over 48 years old whereas Mr. Cons is just under the age of 43.
All in all, the Chief Justice would find it hard to substantiate a recommendation that Mr. Cons should take precedence over Mr. Morley-John in view of the disparity in their experience, seniority and age.
/However
The Right Honourable Sir Alec Douglas-Home Kt., M.P., Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
Downing Street (West),
London S.W.1,
ENGLAND.
19
#
i