to hear particular cases. uch more frequently the court is reinforced
by Judges of the High Court. If efficiency could be improved by a
fresh approach to listing and to the hearing of applications for leave
to appeal the saving would be in regard to those substitutions and not
the permanent establishment.
14..
The only suggestion I have heard about the jurisdiction of
the Court of Appeal ́ arises from a feeling that appeals from the
Magistracy, which are exclusively within the jurisdiction of the High
Court, should be seen to be handled more uniformly. It appears that the listing had been somewhat random. This gave rise to suggestions that these appeals should be heard by a bench of two or more judges or
even in the Court of Appeal. It has now been decided that one judge
alone will be assigned to this work for a period of months. I would
advise that efficiency would be best served by awaiting an evaluation
of that innovation in due course rather than making any change at
present.
5.
The High Court
The liigh Court has an establishment of 20 judges plus two supernumerary posts and the total strength of the Supreme Court which
comprises the High Court and nine Justices of Appeal is therefore 31.
The question of numbers is important and has its place in any discussion about structure and jurisdiction. The highest appellate
court and the highest court of first instance must be exclusive and
highly valued. They not only determine the law. They also set the
standards and judicial policy for the entire Judiciary. To make the Supreme Court too large is to devalue its coinage. What is too large is a matter of judgment. There are no international guidelines and it would be too simplistic to use comparisons based on the sizes of other
judiciaries and populations as conclusive arguments.
84