header-logo header-logo

26 February 2025
Issue: 8106 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

Stress & headaches for judiciary under pressure

Judges fear for their personal safety in and out of court, often work in dilapidated buildings, can’t sleep, suffer from headaches and experience bullying from ‘overbearing’ colleagues, according to the 2024 UK Judicial Attitude Survey.

Some 69% of district judges, 58% of district judges in the magistrates’ court (DJMCs) and 53% of senior coroners have concerns about their safety in court.

Last year, family judge Patrick Peruško was assaulted at Milton Keynes Family Court. In her annual press conference last week, the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr expressed concerns about physical and online attacks and advised judges their safety in court is ‘paramount’.

The survey, carried out by the UCL Judicial Institute on behalf of the judiciary and published this week, covers all UK salaried and fee-paid judicial officeholders. An alarming 14% of all salaried judges, 7% of fee-paid, and 13% of coroners said they have experienced bullying in the past two years—‘primarily by undermining judges’ work, overbearing leadership, demeaning or ridiculing language’ and ‘primarily experienced from their own leadership judge or another judge at their court or a local authority official for coroners’.

If bullied, however, they are unlikely to speak out—more than two-thirds who experienced bullying, harassment or discrimination did not report it. They felt it would make no difference and could adversely affect their future career.

While many courts look impressive from the outside, the physical quality of the building is rated poor or unacceptable by 37% of all judges, and by 49% of district judges and 43% of circuit judges. More than three-quarters of judges say stress at work causes them to lose sleep, more than half suffer headaches and more than a quarter suffer ‘intolerance of others’.

Nevertheless, nearly all (93%) judges feel respected by judicial colleagues and almost all (83%) feel respected by their immediate leadership judge.

Issue: 8106 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Health & safety
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll