Appointment to silk has long been recognised as a lottery. The winners support it; hopefuls avoid dissent for fear of extending the odds against them; and losers despair. It puts the advocate’s interests before the client’s, distorts the market and has a tendency to produce judges from the same mould.
The system appears to fail. Every list has its quota of surprise and puzzlement, both for inclusion and omission. Juniors respected by their peers and solicitors are not appointed, while others with no obvious claim are. Solicitors must fare worse. This year’s list included two deserving cases appointed after repeated applications. Neither could identify any change in his practice or the reaction of the Lord Chancellor’s Department since the earlier rejections.
