TNAG-1589-FCO40-21741-Future-of-the-judiciary-in-Hong-Kong.-Part-1-of-2-1987 — Page 192

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