Rachel Rothwell examines the legacy of ex-Lord Chief Justice Woolf

When Lord Phillips stepped into the role of Lord Chief Justice last month, he had some very big boots to fill. His immediate predecessor, Lord Woolf, has been one of the most respected judges of our times.


‘Lord Woolf is a much-loved man,’ one senior lawyer tells the Gazette. ‘But don’t quote me on that.’ It may seem strange that the highest judge in the land should attract such affection, but the truth is that he is universally adored by all – except perhaps some politicians. ‘Kind’, ‘fair’, ‘generous’, ‘delightful’ even, are all adjectives that crop up time and again when canvassing opinion about the man.


But kindness should not be confused with softness – however the media have attempted to portray the ‘burglar’s friend’ in the past. Lord Woolf stood firm against an onslaught of government pressure during recent negotiations over the abolition of the role of Lord Chancellor – and the judiciary has maintained its strong independent position as a result.


As James Badenoch QC, a former pupil of Lord Woolf in chambers, says: ‘Lord Woolf, with his beautiful manner and his warm-hearted respect for everyone, successfully took on what he perceived to be the government’s wish to impose its will on judges.’


Jeffrey Jowell, professor of public law at University College London, who has co-authored a book with Lord Woolf, says: ‘Harry Woolf will be known as having been outstanding in his rescue of judicial independence and the rule of law. His biggest achievement has been assuring the fundamental independence of the judiciary, at a time when the virtues of those principles were not being fully appreciated or protected.


‘That protection manifested itself in his involvement in the Constitutional Reform Bill, which abolished the office of the Lord Chancellor. It is important that the vacuum has been filled by alternative arrangements.’


He adds: ‘He stood up from time to time to home secretaries such as David Blunkett, who wanted to bypass the principles of access to justice. Lord Woolf stood in the way of these proposals very bravely.’


What was Lord Woolf’s relationship like with that ‘cheeky chappie’, the Lord Chancellor? ‘His relationship has always been co-operative but firm,’ Prof Jowell says. ‘When he made the “cheeky chappie” comment, he was not intending to denigrate the Lord Chancellor personally, but was referring to the fact that he was attempting with undue haste to impose a new system of appointments of judges – and a new Supreme Court – without sufficient consideration of some of the important constitutional principles.’


A former barrister at One Crown Office Row, Lord Woolf became a judge in 1979 at the age of 45 – one of the youngest of modern times, as the Lord Chancellor himself recently pointed out in a valedictory address to the Law Lord. Since then, he has enjoyed a ‘dazzling’ judicial career – Court of Appeal at 53, Law Lord at 59, Master of the Rolls at 63, and Lord Chief Justice at 67.


Perhaps something of the respectful but strained relationship between the two men is revealed in Lord Falconer’s comment: ‘That he has discharged these offices with great skill goes without saying. That he has left a legacy of decided cases, which have and will continue to have an impact on the development of the law for generations, goes without saying. That he was a delight in every respect to appear in front of is probably something of an exaggeration.’


According to one senior lawyer – who preferred not to be named – Lord Woolf’s meteoric rise to the top did raise a few eyebrows in some quarters. He says: ‘There were those who were surprised when he got the job as Lord Chief Justice; he was not famous as a lawyer with a towering intellect. He was not ambitious or power-seeking, and not an advocate who filled the court with silver-tongued oratory. He was just a good and fair man who could see the right answers.’


But Mr Jowell disagrees: ‘Lord Woolf was always in the frame for the top job, and had been when Lord Taylor was appointed, before Lord Bingham. That was because although he seems on the surface more kindly than some of the “hang ‘em and flog ‘em” Lord Chief Justices of the distant past, underneath he is full of common sense and firmness.’


One of Lord Woolf’s best-known legacies will be his eponymous civil justice reforms, which introduced the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) in 1999. Anthony Maton, executive committee member of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, says: ‘There is a downside to the CPR, but as a general rule what happened was a vast improvement on what had gone on before. Many more cases now settle at a very early stage, and there is less overall wasted cost. The parties know where they stand at a much earlier stage.


‘There are criticisms that the system is now claimant-biased, and there is frontloading of costs. It is not perfect, but it is much better than when I came into the law and most cases got to trial, or nearly, before they settled.’


Mr Badenoch, who is chairman of the Expert Witness Institute, thinks the Woolf reforms made a big difference to experts: ‘The independence of expert witnesses from the parties paying them was a principle that already existed, but Lord Woolf’s CPR reforms – and the declaration that all experts now have to sign – was a real advance.


‘He was right to highlight the expert’s real duty, and it was in keeping with his whole ethos generally. His whole approach as a barrister was that the trial was more about reaching the right and just result than it was about winning. He fought his corner as a barrister, and he was extraordinarily adept at getting to the heart of a problem and chopping away anything peripheral. But when he dealt with clients he would always give his opinion about what the fair and right result was, even if it wasn’t what the client wanted to hear.’


Next April, the new Criminal Procedure Rules will come into force. These are based on the civil rules, and are intended to do for criminal law what the CPR did for civil. But Lord Woolf’s best-known contribution to the criminal law was probably the Strangeways report into the prison system. Anthony Edwards, a member of the Sentencing Guidelines Council, over which Lord Woolf presided, says: ‘The Strangeways report had an enormous impact on thinking in the prison system – he identified the causes of problems, such as overcrowding. It was part of his whole philosophy, of recognising that there is good in people.


‘He was represented in the media as being soft on criminals, and that wasn’t fair. His sentences were not actually soft – if you look at the mobile phone robbery guidelines [which recommended a prison sentence of least 18 months], they were probably higher than they will be in the future.’


Mr Jowell adds: ‘Lord Woolf has seen the inside of more prisons than any of his media critics, and he is well aware of the capability of prisons to harm people as well as to help them.’


Lord Woolf may have retired as Lord Chief Justice, but his post-retirement schedule will not leave much time for armchair snoozing. He plans to sit in the House of Lords and the Hong Kong Court of Appeal, he will be a law lecturer at University College London, and he is patron of various charities. Plus, to top up a pension worth half of his £211,399 salary, he will also act as an arbitrator, through Blackstone Chambers. This was on the suggestion of his friend Mr Jowell, who says: ‘He is a very fair person, and, at the same time, enormously experienced in adjudication. He will be a very good teacher, because he enjoys speaking about law.’


Mr Badenoch agrees: ‘I grew up as a barrister with Lord Woolf in chambers. He was always approachable, and always gave his time to the younger barristers, even when he was very busy.’


Mr Edwards adds: ‘He always showed extraordinary kindness to me. If you are out of your depth, he will come and rescue you rather than make you look a fool.’ He will be a tough act to follow.