3
Name
H. Litton, Q.C.
Remarks
President of the llong Kong Bar Association. Although excellent material, he is only 37 and there- fore considered to be too young.
Mr. Wright said, without any prompting from the Chief Justice, that Mr. Jackson-Lipkin was undoubtedly the best candidate.
Mr. Jackson-Lipkin is very highly regarded by all the Supreme Court judges. He is an extremely sound lawyer, both in criminal and civil matters. As an advocate he is undoubtedly sup- Mr. Jack- erior to any other present member of the liong Kong Bar. son-Lipkin is 49 years of age (born on the 24th May 1923). He was He is a member of educated at Harrow and Trinity College, Oxford. the Middle Temple and was called to the English Bar in June 1951; he was admitted to the Hong Kong Bar in January 1963. He has had about 18 years' experience at the English Bar, having practised in the Chambers of J.E.S. Simon, Q.C. (now Lord Simon of Glaisdale) at 1 Mitre Building, Temple, London E.C.4, from 1951 to 1969. He is married to a Chinese lady, herself a barrister, who practised in London and is now a Crown Counsel, on temporary month-to-month terms in the Attorney General's Chambers. I understand that, for personal and family reasons, Mr. Jackson-Lipkin decided to practise permanently in Hong Kong, and, to that end, took up residence in Hong Kong in September 1969.
In making this recommendation for the appointment of Mr. Jackson-Lipkin the Chief Justice has advised that he has borne specifically in mind the contents of Mr. E.0. Laird's confidential letter reference HK K 14/30 of 4th November 1970 to the then Acting Colonial Secretary (Mr. Holmes) on the subject of an occasional appointment to the Supreme Court Bench of a member of the Hong Kong Bar and the criteria indicated in the paper reference HK K 14/14 Domestic Iteme No. 1 dated 24th November 1969 as a pre-requisite
The Chief Justice has em- for any such appointment from the Bar. phasized that in making this recommendation, he has done so not because it is politically expedient to give effect to the petition from the Bar (forwarded to you under cover of my Confidential Saving Despatch No. Staff 37 of 25th April 1972) asking that members of the Bar be appointed to the Bench, but solely because he is satisfied that the ability and experience of Mr. Jackson-Lipkin would be a great asset to the existing Supreme Court Bench and therefore in the best interests of the administration of justice.
It must, of course, be expected that the appointment of a practising member of the Bar, for the first time, to the Supreme Court, will be resented by serving officers, who believe that all such appointments should be reserved for serving officers. However, an appointment from the Bar to one of two newly created additional
I therefore do not con- posts should be less unacceptable to them. sider that the reaction of the service to Mr. Jackson-Lipkin's ap- pointment is likely to be so hostile that I should advise that the proposal to appoint him be abandoned on that ground.
*
CONTIDENTIAL
.....I