The judges

Contents:

The judicial workforce

The number of judges New Zealand has serving in each court at any given time is set out in legislation.[7] At 31 December 2024 there were 265 permanent judges and associate judges, 38 acting judges and 253 [8] judicial officers presiding in New Zealand’s court system.[9] A list of all sitting judges and judicial officers in 2024 can be found in Appendix 4. Judges who retired during 2024 are listed in Appendix 5.

The numbers of judges by court are as follows:

Supreme Court \| Te Kōti Mana Nui	Six judges One acting judge
Court of Appeal \| To Kōti Pīra	10 judges Two acting judges
High Court \| Te Kōti Matua	40 judges Four acting judges Eight associate judges [10]
District Court \| Te Kōti-ā-Rohe	171 judges [11] 30 acting warranted judges 18 community magistrates Two acting community magistrates Six Family Court Associates Approximately 178 judicial justices of the peace (JJPs)
Te Kooti Whenua Māori \| Māori Land Court and Te Kooti Pīra Māori \| Māori Appellate Court	14 judges One acting judge
Employment Court \| Te Kōti Take Mahi	Five judges
Environment Court \| Te Kōti Taiao	Eight judges 13 alternate judges [12] 11 environment commissioners Two deputy environment commissioners
Coroners Court \|Te Kōti Kaitirotiro Matewhawhati	20 coroners [13] Nine relief coroners [14] Eight associate coroners [15]
Court Martial \|Te Kōti Whakawā Kaimahi o te Ope Kātua	10 judges [16]
Court Martial Appeal Court \|Te Kōti Pīra Whakawā Kaimahi o te Ope Kātua	Three appointed judges [17]

Appointments – New judges and judicial officers in 2024

There were 22 new appointments to the judiciary in 2024, including six appointments to the newly-established Family Court associate role.

Judges and judicial officers are appointed from the senior ranks of the legal profession – lawyers who have proven to be excellent in the law. They are generally appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General consults with the Chief Justice for appointments to the senior courts and with the relevant head of bench for appointments to other courts.[18]

Judges are selected against clearly-defined criteria for assessing suitability, set out in protocols that also prescribe the appointment process.[19] These criteria cover legal ability, qualities of character (including personal honesty and integrity, open-mindedness, impartiality, courtesy and social sensitivity), personal technical skills (such as effective communication, mental agility, time management and organisational skills), and reflection of society (the quality of being a person who understands New Zealand society).

For more information on judicial appointments, see Appendix 3.

Court	New judges and judicial officers appointed by bench (excluding elevations) [20]
High Court	Five judges [21] One associate judge
District Court	Seven judges Six Family Court Associates
Māori Land Court	One judge
Employment Court
Environment Court	One judge
Coroners Court	One associate coroner

Acting judges
Acting judges are typically judges who have reached the mandatory age of retirement for judges (70) and have been granted an acting warrant or commission to continue on the bench. They play a crucial part in the continued operation of the courts to enable courts to deal with short- term work pressures or judicial absences (for instance, because of ill health). However, the use of acting warrants is not an acceptable solution to long-term judicial workload pressures.

During the year, 16 judges and judicial officers reached the mandatory retirement age. Seven of those judges and judicial officers continued in an acting warranted capacity.

Ensuring there are enough judges for the work of the court
The number of judges who can serve on each bench at any given time is limited by statutory provisions, referred to as statutory caps.[22] For example, the statutory cap for judges in the senior courts (that is, the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court) is 55, plus the Chief Justice. This limit has remained the same since 2004 and acts as a constraint on the number of judges who can be appointed to the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Since 2004, the workload of those courts, and the complexity of the work before the courts, has increased considerably.

As a consequence, the High Court and the Court of Appeal have insufficient judges to manage the workload. This is a significant contributor to delays in these courts. To assist in managing this, it is now necessary to use acting judges (that is, judges who have reached 70, the age of retirement for judges, and are appointed on acting warrants until the maximum age of 75) in the Court of Appeal and High Court to carry out the normal range of work.[23]

The challenge is even greater in the District Court, where acting judges currently make up 16 per cent of the effective bench.

Where population growth or long-term changes in workload have occurred, the constitutionally appropriate way to ensure there are enough judges is for the legislative cap to be adjusted.

Publication of terms and conditions of judicial appointment
Judges’ salaries and superannuation entitlements are publicly available and are set out in the Judicial Officers Salaries and Allowances (2023/24) Determination 2023 and the Judicial Officers Superannuation Determination 2019. In April, the Chief Justice, with the agreement and support of the Attorney-General, announced the release of the detailed terms and conditions of judicial appointment for the Senior Courts and Employment Court.

The District Court terms and conditions of judicial appointment are being updated and will be released once that review has taken place.

Judicial appointment — the pathway to becoming a High Court judge
The Chief Justice and Attorney-General Hon Judith Collins KC MP took part in a webinar in November to discuss what they consider when recommending and selecting appointees to the High Court bench. They also shared their own experiences in becoming leaders within the judiciary and the profession.

Hosted by the New Zealand Law Society’s professional development body, NZLS CLE, the Judicial Appointment – The Pathway to Becoming a High Court Judge webinar attracted more than 700 online attendees.

For information on the process of judicial appointment, see Appendix 3.

"Judicial diversity is more than a democratic ideal. It brings necessary content to our law so that it is fit to regulate our society in this time. The common law has always drawn on the values of its society – concepts such as a 'reasonable person', 'reasonable expectation of privacy', limits of free speech, defamation, and conduct. They have all depended on judges over the centuries drawing on their knowledge of societal values."

CHIEF JUSTICE HELEN WINKELMANN

Judicial diversity census
In 2023, in order to better understand the make- up of the judiciary, the Office of the Chief Justice developed a survey to capture information on education, religion, professional background, ethnicity and geography, gender and sexuality. This information has been collected from new judges since then.

The appointment pool: Moving towards a diverse and representative judiciary
The diversity of the judiciary depends on the diversity of the legal profession. The New Zealand Law Society | Te Kāhui Ture o Aotearoa reports annually to its members about the demographics of the profession,[24] and these reports indicate that the profession is increasing in diversity in the younger ranks.

Some law firms and chambers support initiatives to increase diversity in the profession – for example by providing scholarships and mentorships to support students who may otherwise not have pursued a career in law.[25]

Others promote diversity and inclusion initiatives to attract and keep women and diverse candidates to and in their firms.[26] These initiatives to bring and retain a greater diversity of people, thought and experience into the profession are to be commended.

Judicial wellbeing

High workloads, exposure to distressing content, case management pressures, rising security concerns – there are many factors now recognised to cause work-related stress for judges. Given the impact that judicial decisions have both on the parties to the proceeding and on the development of the law, it is critical that judges are supported to judge well. Heads of bench continue to take a proactive approach to judicial wellbeing.

Judges are able, and encouraged, to get professional support as a routine part of their judicial practice. This initiative was the recommendation of the Judicial Wellbeing Steering Group, which includes judicial representatives and expert advisor Professor Ian Lambie ONZM.

There is a tension between judicial wellbeing and court timeliness. Court resourcing, and in particular judge numbers, has not kept up with population grown and increasing case volumes. Nor has it taken account of the increased complexity of proceedings. These factors have led to increased and unsustainable caseloads for many judges. The Chief Justice and Heads of Bench continue to advocate for better resourcing of the judiciary (see above).

Judicial conduct

Judges are expected to conform to a high standard of behaviour, both off and on the bench. The Guidelines for Judicial Conduct outline these expectations.[27]

There are three processes in place for anyone who wishes to raise concerns about the conduct of a judge:

The primary mechanism for dealing with complaints of judicial misconduct is through the independent office of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, established under the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and Judicial Conduct Panel Act 2004. That Act sets out a process for investigating complaints about judicial conduct and for removal of a judge or relevant judicial officer from office for serious misconduct. The Act’s processes are designed to ensure that judicial independence and natural justice are protected and observed.
The judiciary and the New Zealand Law Society have an informal process for dealing with concerns about judges’ conduct in court (available on the Courts of New Zealand website).
The judiciary has established a policy for registry or Ministry of Justice staff members to raise concerns or complain about bullying or harassment by a judge. A complementary policy is being developed for judicial officers (such as community magistrates and judicial justices of the peace), led by the Chief District Court Judge’s Chambers | Te Whare o Ngā Kaihautū Waka o te Kōti-a-Rohe o Aotearoa.

Judicial attendance at Waitangi

The judiciary continued the tradition of attending Waitangi Day celebrations to mark the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The judiciary including heads of bench was welcomed onto Te Whare Rūnanga Marae, where Justice Joe Williams, Chief District Court Judge Heemi Taumaunu, and District Court Judge Greg Davis spoke for the judiciary. The Chief Justice was invited to speak at the conclusion of the formalities.

Previous section: An independent and impartial judiciary

Next section: Judicial education

Footnotes

[7] Statutes include the Senior Courts Act 2016, the District Court Act 2016 and specialist court acts such as the Employment Relations Act 2000.

[8] Judicial officers are made up of 75 community magistrates, environment commissioners and deputy commissioners, coroners, relief coroners and associate coroners, and 178 judicial justices of the peace.

[9] Some judges and judicial officers hold more than one position or sit in more than one court.

[10] One associate judge is currently appointed full-time as Chair of the Independent Police Conduct Authority | Mana Whanonga Pirihimana Motuhake.

[11] Including judges on secondment or performing special roles (such as Children’s Commissioner or Chief Coroner) but excluding Environment Court judges.

[12] “Alternate judge” is the terminology used in the Resource Management Act for “acting judge”. Alternate judges are either retired Environment Court judges or serving judges of the District Court or Māori Land Court. Alternate judges who are retired Environment Court judges generally serve in a full-time capacity, whereas alternate judges who are serving judges of the District Court or Māori Land Court sit only on select cases.

[13] During 2022, the cap in the Coroners Act 2006 was raised from 20 to 22 – see s 109(2)(a).

[14] Relief coroners perform the same role and function as coroners. They have a fixed-term warrant and may work either full or part-time. Associate coroners hold a fixed-term warrant and do not have the power to hold an inquest.

[15] The Chief Coroner has been included in both the Coroners Court and the District Court counts.

[16] Only the Chief Judge sits full-time in the Court Martial. The Deputy Chief Judge and all other judges are District Court Judges who sit on an as-required basis.

[17] Appointed judges are practising lawyers or retired High Court judges, who sit in this court on an as-required basis. All judges of the High Court are also judges of the Court Martial Appeal Court. The Court sits as a panel of three, with at least one appointed judge.

[18] For the terms and conditions of judicial appointment for the senior courts and Employment Court, see https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/about-the-judiciary/terms-and-conditions-of-judicial-appointment

[19] See the Judicial Appointments Protocol – Senior Courts; Judicial Appointments Information Booklet – District Court; and Information on Statutory Vacancies (Ministry of Justice).

[20] Elevation is the term used when an existing judge is appointed to a higher court than the court they sit in. For example, Justice Grau was appointed to the High Court from the District Court. She had served as a District Court judge since 2021.

[21] This number does not include Justice Grau who was appointed within the judiciary on 29 January 2024.

[22] Statutes include the Senior Courts Act 2016, the District Court Act 2016 and specialist court Acts such as the Employment Relations Act 2000.

[23] In 2024, three acting Court of Appeal judges and five acting High Court judges supported the work of the courts.

[24] Marianne Burt and Jacqui Van Der Kaay, “Snapshot of the profession 2024”. www.lawsociety.org.nz/assets/About-Us-Documents/Annual-Reports/Snapshot-of-Legal-Profession

[25] An example is Meredith Connell’s scholarship “Te Kuhunga”, which is aimed at supporting students in lower decile schools into and through a legal education.

[26] For example, DLA Piper set up a diversity and inclusion steering committee in 2017. The committee promotes an inclusive work environment for all, flexible working and workplace agility, cross-generational understanding, and inclusivity of all races and cultures. Minter Ellison Rudd Watts reports on gender and ethnicity pay gaps, and is committed to closing them.

[27] See https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/about-the-judiciary/judicialconduct