HC Deb 06 December 1951 vol 494 cc2555-6
39 and 40. Mr. Janner

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what are the qualifications of magistrates who sit at Sessions to hear appeals from the juvenile court; and what is their average age in London and throughout the country as a whole; and

(2) whether he is aware that justices cannot adjudicate in the juvenile courts after 65 years of age, whereas the retiring age of those who sit at Sessions to hear appeals from the juvenile courts is 75 years of age; and what steps he is taking to correct this anomaly.

Sir D. Maxwell Fyfe

Justices who have attained the age of 65 years cannot in general adjudicate in juvenile courts, but are eligible, up to the age of 75, for appointment to the appeal committee, which in a county hears appeals from juvenile courts as well as appeals in ordinary cases. Except in London, where there is special provision, the appeal committee is appointed by quarter sessions from among justices on the active list and quarter sessions are required to select, so far as practicable, justices having special qualifications for the hearing of appeals, including justices specially qualified for dealing with juvenile cases. It would not be practicable to have one age limit for justices hearing appeals in juvenile cases and another age limit in other cases. The average age of the lay justices on the appeal panel in London is 64; the figure for the country as a whole is not available.

Mr. Janner

Whilst appreciating that reply, may I ask if it is not rather an anomaly that a justice who originally tries a case in the juvenile courts must not be of an age above 65, whereas a justice who tries an appeal from a decision of that court can have reached the age of 75? Ought not that anomaly to be removed one way or the other?

Sir D. Maxwell Fyfe

The answer to the supplementary question is that quarter sessions must use discretion in electing their appeal committees. Surely that is not beyond the powers of quarter sessions benches.

Mr. Janner

Whilst appreciating that it is not beyond the powers of quarter sessions to do anything and everything, is this not an anomaly? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say why the age limit is lower in one case than in the other?

Sir D. Maxwell Fyfe

Because a special rule was desired for juvenile courts. The question of the appeal committee is essentially one for quarter sessions, and I am sure that any judicial body should be entitled to make its own selection and will use responsibility in doing so.