
As the Supreme Court completes its first year of sittings this week, nobody is saying anything about the contribution to its jurisprudence by the third most senior member of the court, Lord Saville of Newdigate. That is because -- as far as I can see -- Lord Saville has not written a single judgment.
A search through the court's rulings reveals the occasional paragraph or two in which Lord Saville says whom he agrees with. But even in cases where Lord Saville has presided, the "judgment of the court" has been written by someone else.
Of course, I am happy to be corrected by anyone who has found a substantive judgment written by Lord Saville during the past year. And even though he now retires from the court, he may have written substantively in cases where judgment has yet to be delivered; he sat, for example, on one of the cases in which a ruling is to be delivered tomorrow.
Update, 28 July: Again, no judgment from Lord Saville today. Again, in the case where he presided, the most junior member of the court -- Sir John Dyson -- has written the court's judgment.
Second update: Talking of vacancies in the Supreme Court, I see that the Bar Council is holding an event in December called Improve Your Chances of Judicial Selection. The speaker is Jonathan Sumption QC.
Post your comment
Joshua Rozenberg is an independent legal commentator who presents Law in Action on BBC Radio 4.
- World Youth Day Diary: Day One
- Breivik and Anti-Muslim Bigotry
- Who'd be a TLA?
- Daniel Johnson on Elena Bonner
- In praise of the essay
- Told You So
- Analysis: Al-Qaeda After Bin Laden
- Help JIMAS
- How Western Jihadis See Libya
- Sumption plays hard to get
- The Commentator — A Serious New Website
- Supreme Court: runners, riders and delays
- In defence of Quilliam
- Self-censorship in the British Media
- Parliament Square is not Tahrir Square
- How does this end?
- Gaddafi has little to fear from ICC
- "We call them the nutters, because that's what they are"
- Peter Oborne's Hypocrisies


















