Appointment of King's Counsel in Scotland 2025

Assessment

The Lord Justice General is solely responsible for determining which of the applicants should be nominated for appointment. He conducts a detailed assessment of each application, including checking any reported cases mentioned in the applications, and considers the references supplied. I had access to the Lord Justice General’s assessment of each applicant.

The Lord Justice General is assisted by the views of all the Senators of the College of Justice (the judges sitting in the Court of Session and in the High Court of Justiciary) and this year also the President of the Sheriff Appeal Court; and by a scoring panel of Senators appointed by the Lord Justice General to consider the applications in detail.

All judges had access to the applicants’ self–assessments and were invited to indicate if they have knowledge of their performance in court and other settings and, if so, to express an opinion on their fitness for appointment as King’s Counsel. Several of the judges made specific reference to the application criteria when making their comments.

The role and composition of the scoring panel is set out in paragraphs 4.8 to 4.10 of the Guide for Applicants.

Members of the panel use a form to record scores on a five-point scale for the three selection criteria (from very well demonstrated to not demonstrated), to comment on an applicant’s suitability for appointment and to provide an overall assessment, unless the applicant is not sufficiently well known to them or if they consider the application is premature. The overall assessment can be that an applicant is well fitted now and sufficiently outstanding to merit appointment; is possibly ready now but not in the front rank of applicants for appointment; is not obviously fitted at present; or is not fitted.

The panel met on 17 June. The minutes record that the Lord Justice General’s assessment of each applicant was circulated in advance to the panel for their consideration.

The panel discussed each applicant in order of the numbered applications, and each was discussed fully to consider their suitability for appointment as King’s Counsel. The panel agreed on the eleven applicants to be nominated for appointment.

One of the matters considered by the panel, which I discussed last year with the then Lord Justice General, is the relative or total absence from the courts of some applicants due to their extensive involvement in long-running Public Inquiries. This year, three of those being nominated have been or are closely involved in long-running Inquiries.

As last year, the panel also considered, under the terms of the Guide for Applicants, whether any applicants should be nominated for appointment if they have not practiced in the superior courts for at least thirteen years but have relevant other experience. This year, one such applicant is being nominated for appointment.