1
2 -
on
the grounds
"promoted" and
independence
that
judges
are "appointed" rather than
such a scheme would interfere with the
of the Judiciary. Factors were however drafted
by GAD for judges with a retirement age of 65. These were
subsequently modified by us to ensure that the maximum
compensation factor would not exceed 4.76 times the annual
salary as provided under the LCS proper and I attach a copy. However these factors might need rechecking by GAD.
[1 'paragraph 10(3)" - I am
apparent effect of the cap!
likely effect will surely
argue for one lump sum payment.
not sure what to say about the
However I would observe that the
be to make the HMOCS Association
"paragraph 11′′
I agree that the provisions of paragraphs 10(2), (3) and (5) would apply to the calculation and payment
of compensation to officers superseded for promotion.
Calculation of compensatation for supersession for promotion
for localisation reasons under the LCS is based on the
substantive rank held. This is fair.
any other form of supersession.
fair.
There is no question of The HMOCS scheme is also
The reality is that all such superseded officers would
likely be up above the proposed cap under the HMOCS scheme I think we should leave this unchanged. Let the HMOCS Association raise the point if they wish to do so during
anyway.
consultations.
"paragraph 12" provisions
of
linked
to
11,
the
- I agree that like paragraph
paragraph
12 should in principle be properly
paragraph 10. I must say however that I cannot see