 | This articleis missing information about effects of the act other than on the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords. Please expand the article to include this information. Further details may exist on thetalk page.(October 2014) |
| Act of Parliament | |
.svg) | |
| Long title | An Act for delaying the coming into operation of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873. |
|---|---|
| Citation | 37 & 38 Vict. c. 83 |
| Territorial extent | United Kingdom |
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 7 August 1874 |
| Commencement | 7 August 1874[e] |
| Repealed | 22 September 1893 |
| Other legislation | |
| Amends | Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873 |
| Amended by | Statute Law Revision Act 1883 |
| Repealed by | Statute Law Revision (No. 2) Act 1893 |
| Relates to | Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875 |
Status: Repealed | |
| Text of statute as originally enacted | |
TheSupreme Court of Judicature Act 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66) (sometimes known as theJudicature Act 1873) was anact of theParliament of the United Kingdom in 1873. It reorganised theEnglish court system to establish theHigh Court and theCourt of Appeal, and also originally provided for the abolition of thejudicial functions of the House of Lords with respect toEngland. It would have retained those functions in relation toScotland andIreland for the time being. However, theGladstoneLiberal government fell in 1874 before the act entered into force, and the succeedingDisraeliConservative government suspended the entry into force of the act by means of theSupreme Court of Judicature (Commencement) Act 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 83) and theSupreme Court of Judicature Act 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 77).
The legislation for the act was drafted by the Judicature Commission which was chaired byLord ChancellorHatherley.[1] Other members of the commission included judgeGeorge Bramwell, lawyersSir John Hollams,Sir Robert Collier, andJohn Burgess Karslake, and parliament memberGeorge Ward Hunt.[1]
One of the reasons that the Liberal government under Gladstone wanted to abolish the judicial aspect of theHouse of Lords was that it was concerned for the poor quality ofjudges at this court. Judges at the House of Lords secured their position by mere virtue of the fact that their fathers werehereditary peers and so individuals would automatically inherit seats in the upper house rather than securing their position through merit. Therefore, some of the bestlawyers in the land were prohibited from sitting as judges in the upper house simply because of their parentage.
However, under the Conservative government, the 1874 and 1875 acts retained the judicial aspect of the House of Lords and ensured the quality of judicial appointments to the House of Lords by legislating under theAppellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 59), for the mechanism oflaw lords. The reigning monarch could appoint any individual to be a peer and thus a judge in the House of Lords. These judicial life peers would hold seats only for the duration of their life; their seat would not pass through their inheritance to their son. Thus,Queen Victoria and subsequent monarchs were able to appoint leading lawyers to adjudicate in the House of Lords by making them life peers.
Section 1 of the act provided that the act may be cited the "Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873".
Section 2 of the act provided that the act would come into force on 2 November 1874. This act was repealed and replaced was repealed and replaced by section 2 of theSupreme Court of Judicature (Commencement) Act 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 83). Section 2 of theSupreme Court of Judicature Act 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 77) provided that the act would come into force on 1 November 1875, except any provision of that act declared to take effect before the commencement of the act and except sections 20, 21 and 25, which would come into force on 1 November 1876.
The preamble to the act provided that the act would extend toEngland and Wales.
Lord Cairns, Disraeli'sLord Chancellor, sought to remove theHouse of Lords jurisdiction for Scottish and Irish appeals as well, which would have completely removed its judicial jurisdiction. However, the Lord Chancellor could not muster the necessary support in Parliament for the bill as originally proposed in 1874 or when it was reintroduced in 1875. Finally, when it became clear that the English legal profession was firmly opposed to the reform proposals, theAppellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 59) removed the provisions for the abolition of the judicial functions of the House of Lords, although it retained the provisions that established theHigh Court and theCourt of Appeal.
The whole act, except sections 25(2), 46, 64 and 66 of the act, was repealed by section 226(1) of, and the sixth schedule to theSupreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo. 5. c. 49).
Section 25(2) of the act was repealed by section 34(4) of, and the schedule to, theLimitation Act 1939 (2 & 3 Geo. 6. c. 21).
Section 46 of the act ceased to have effect by section 34(1) of, and schedule 2 to, theAdministration of Justice Act 1965.
Section 64 of the act was repealed by section 5 of, and schedule 5 to, theRules of the Supreme Court (Revision) 1962 (SI 1962/2145).
Section 66 of the act, being the only repealed section of the act, was repealed by section 1(2) of, and schedule 2 of theRules of the Supreme Court (Revision) 1965 (SI 1965/1776).
