CHAPTER VIII
THE STRUCTURE OF THE COURTS AND TRIBUNALS AND
THE DISTRIBUTION OF BUSINESS
1.
There are two separate questions in this Study, one about re-arrangement of work as between the various courts and tribunals and the other about alteration of the structure and hierarchy of the courts which although best discussed together are indeed separate concepts.
The demands of structure are obviously not the same as those of
functions and the question which are prior has exercised many great
thinkers. For present purposes it will be best to take them as
inextricably intertwined.
2.
In my discussions I have met very wide variations of opinion
about both structure and function and might forecast that a poll taken in the legal community would provide each of three proposals with some
support. One would be to leave structure and the various levels of
jurisdiction alone, the second to leave structure alone but enlarge inferior jurisdictional levels and the third to change the fundamental
structure. This indicates a need for deliberate examination of the
the radical proposals coupled with
the early adjustment of
monetary levels of jurisdiction if they are demonstrably too low.
more
3.
The Court of Appeal
The supreme position of the Court of Appeal in the hierarchy
is obvious and calls for no comment. The structural point that its
size should not be disproportionate to the Judiciary as a whole is
worth keeping in mind. (I do not think it can be reduced but I consider this below in relation to the Supreme Court as a whole.) With
an establishment of nine judges in three Divisions its members are
fully occupied. The reading days enhance efficiency. Justices of
Appeal also sit at first instance at the request of the Chief Justice
83
10
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.