The Chancellor

G.Jessel made this Freedom of Information request to Ministry of Justice

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Waiting for an internal review by Ministry of Justice of their handling of this request.

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Under the FOI ACT can you provide all information you hold relating to how one would access a Chancellor sitting as a judge.

All Chancellor's are judges but not all judges are Chancellor's.

The Lord Chancellor no longer sits as a judge, therefore is the Chancellor of the Chancery Division still able to sit as a Chancellor in the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court.

Who holds the position of Vice-Chancellor and can they sit as a Chancellor, and is any other position available within any of the courts to hear inherent Equity cases.

Yours faithfully,

G.Jessel

Carr, Simon,

1 Attachment

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Carr, Simon,

1 Attachment

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Dear Carr, Simon,

Thank you for your response.

I am sorry to hear we no longer have a Vice Chancellor with the capabilities to sit as a Chancellor under the inherent equity jurisdiction of the High Court.

Can you confirm when a Vice Chancellor will be appointed to hear equity suits under the inherent equity original jurisdiction side of the court. And confirm whether or not the Chancellor of the Chancery Division can still sit as a Chancellor to hear these suits.

For clarification the Equity of which I speak is strictly the inherent original equity not the substituted version created after the merger of the court rules ( but not the merger of the separate jurisdictions ) after the Supreme Court Judicatures Act of 1873 and 1875.

Yours sincerely,

G.Jessel

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Justice's handling of my FOI request 'The Chancellor'.

For clarification the Equity of which I speak is strictly the inherent original equity not the substituted version created after the merger of the court rules ( but not the merger of the separate jurisdictions ) after the Supreme Court Judicatures Act of 1873 and 1875.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/t...

Yours faithfully,

G.Jessel

Carr, Simon,

Dear G Jessel

Thank you for your e-mail below and I apologise for the delay in responding. The confirmation you seek regarding the appointment of a Vice Chancellor and the jurisdiction of the Chancellor of the Chancery Division is not a request for information held in a recorded format and will therefore not covered under the Freedom of Information Act. However, I have asked colleagues in Judicial Office to consider the points you raise and you will receive a response shortly.

Regards

Simon Carr

Simon Carr | Assistant Private Secretary to the Senior President of Tribunals | Room E218 Royal Courts of Justice | London WC2A 2LL

show quoted sections

Carr, Simon,

Dear G Jessel

I have been advised by Judicial Office colleagues that there will not be a Vice Chancellor appointed - the office was abolished some time ago and the current judicial offices and their relationship with the executive are outlined in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.

Regarding the second point you raise, I am advised that Supreme Court Judicature Acts merged the equity jurisdiction and the common law jurisdiction into a single High Court, with a uniform system of pleading and procedure. The equitable principles still apply from time to time and the Chancellor is of course competent to hear all cases relating to equity matters, as are all the judges of the Chancery Division, although cases brought in the Chancery Division are not necessarily attributed to any one judge even when a specific request is made.

I hope this helps.

Regards

Simon Carr

Simon Carr | Assistant Private Secretary to the Senior President of Tribunals | Room E218 Royal Courts of Justice | London WC2A 2LL

show quoted sections

Dear Carr, Simon,
I am extremely disappointed that a Vice Chancellor is not to be appointed to hear exclusive equity jurisdiction cases.

It is impossible to abolish Equity Jurisprudence that should be operating within all the courts since the merger of the rules to ensure complete justice.

Please point to the precise part of the legislation that shall show where the equity jurisdiction and the common law jurisdiction were merger, rather than just the merger of the procedural rules to enable a uniform system of pleading and procedure and not the merger of the separate jurisdiction.

Yours sincerely,

G.Jessel

Peter Danby left an annotation ()

How can Act/Statutes of Parliament merge with Common Law ? Common Law is the peoples laws" statutes/acts are politicians legislation, they are by consent. Who gave the chancellor the right to merge statutes and common law together, they are not of the same understanding or meaning.