Previous Judicial Experience – Candidate Guidance

What is Previous Judicial Experience (PJE)? (Back to top)

Previous Judicial Experience (PJE) is a non-statutory eligibility criterion typically required for most salaried judicial appointments. PJE ensures that candidates have been tested and have had the opportunity to develop relevant experience before applying for salaried office. The current wording for PJE as set by the Lord Chancellor is:

Candidates are expected to have previous judicial experience, sitting as a judge or as a coroner in a salaried or fee-paid capacity or a similar role such as the chair of an equivalent body for which a legal qualification is required. An equivalent body is one of a quasi-judicial nature for which the powers and procedures should resemble those of a court of law and involve highly complex matters, requiring its members objectively to determine the facts and draw conclusions to reach a reasoned decision.  Such decisions could result in the imposition of a penalty, and they are likely to affect the legal rights, duties or privileges of specific parties. 

Examples could include, but are not restricted: 

• Disciplinary tribunals and conduct hearings for professional standards bodies  
• Arbitration  
• Parole Board 
• Chair of a statutory inquiry  

The length of judicial experience required is a minimum of XX* completed sitting days, since appointment, not including training or sick days. Only in exceptional cases and if the candidate in question has demonstrated the necessary skills in some other significant way should an exception be made.

The length of judicial experience required is usually a minimum of 30 completed sitting days at the point of application not including training or sick days. However, for some roles this has previously been reduced to 15 days. You should check the information page for the post you are applying to confirm the number of sitting days required. A sitting day is counted when you are undertaking judicial decision-making and presiding over hearings. Drafting written decisions from hearings would not normally count. However, deciding cases on paper may count as a sitting day if you are making substantive judicial decisions.

Guidance on meeting the PJE criterion (Back to top)

The Judicial Appointments Commission is unable to provide specific advice on how an individual may meet the PJE criterion for a particular post. This is because each candidate’s background, skills and experience are unique to them, and only a candidate can determine how their circumstances align with the requirements.

However, the following general guidance is intended to help you understand how to present your experience effectively:

The PJE criterion can be considered in three parts:

1. Judicial Experience: Have you previously sat as a judge or coroner in a salaried or fee-paid capacity for the minimum number of completed sitting days required for the post?
2. Equivalent Quasi-Judicial Experience: Have you held a role similar to that of a judge or coroner, such as chairing a tribunal or regulatory body?
3. Demonstrating Skills in Another Significant Way: Can you demonstrate the necessary judicial skills through other significant experience?

Judicial Experience (Back to top)

In your application you will be asked to list all the judicial roles that you currently hold and have held throughout your career, as well as the number of completed sitting days for each role.

Quasi-judicial experience (Back to top)

If you do not have direct judicial experience, you will need to demonstrate experience in a similar quasi-judicial role. The role should:

– Be quasi-judicial in nature,

– Resemble the powers and procedures of a court of law,

– Require complex decision-making, including fact-finding and reasoned decision making,

– Decisions are likely to affect the legal rights, duties or privileges of parties.

When completing your application, you will be required to list all quasi- judicial roles that you currently hold and have held throughout your career, as well as the number of completed sitting days for each role. You will also need to confirm if a legal qualification is required for the role and to outline the powers, procedures and main responsibilities of the role.

You should include as much specific information about the role for the Commission to be able to make a full assessment of these roles. It is expected that the following points are addressed:

– Does the role require you to manage a hearing?

– Does the role require you to decide on the outcome?

– Does the role require you to write up your decision?

Note: Sitting days can be accumulated across multiple eligible roles. For example, for a post requiring 30 completed sitting days, it is acceptable to have 10 days in a judicial role and 20 days in a quasi-judicial role.

Examples of where the JACs Selection and Character Committee have previously decided a role does not meet Quasi-Judicial experience are:

• Magistrate

Although the role of Magistrate manages a hearing and makes decisions, this is supported by a legal advisor.

• Legal Advisor, Magistrates Court

Although this role may require a legal qualification, it acts in a supporting and advisory capacity, does not manage a hearing or issue binding, reasoned decisions that determine parties’ rights or impose penalties.

• Senior Member (Chair) of the Valuation Tribunal for England

This role lacks the responsibility for producing binding, reasoned decisions, and the procedural and legal responsibilities are heavily dependent on the advice of clerks’.

Demonstrating Skills in Another Significant Way (Back to top)

In exceptional cases, where you lack both judicial and equivalent quasi-judicial experience, the JAC may consider whether you have demonstrated the necessary skills in another significant way. As with quasi-judicial experience, you should include as much specific information as possible.

(*The minimum length of judicial experience required will be dependent on the exercise.)