Kerala High Court Alters Senior Advocate Rules per Supreme Court's Latest Guidance.

In response to the 2023 Supreme Court directives in the case of Indira Jaising v. Union of India, the Kerala High Court has updated its rules from 2018 to modify the criteria for designating senior advocates

As per the revisions, an advocate predominantly practicing in the High Court can now be considered for senior advocate status. Yet, allowances may be granted for advocates practicing in Tribunals in connection with their High Court appearances.

The amendments outline that an advocate could be considered for the designation of 'Senior Advocate' by the Full Court on its own accord if the advocate is deemed to possess extraordinary quality, prominence, and specialized legal expertise in any field.

Rule 4 has been altered to define the criteria for becoming a Senior Advocate. Previously, the requirement was a decade of experience, but now it includes a decade of combined practice as an Advocate and in roles like District and Sessions Judge or Judicial Member of any Tribunal, with at least three years of advocacy experience after retiring from such positions.

A notable change is the imposition of a minimum age limit of 45 years. Age relaxation can only be granted by the Committee or upon recommendation by the Chief Justice or a Judge from the Kerala High Court for advocate designation.

The 2018 Rules outlined the formation of a 'Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates.' The amendments now specify that this Committee will include the following individuals:

In the past, application notifications were exclusively shared on the Kerala High Court's official website. Under the recent revisions, these notifications will also be extended to the High Court Advocates Association and Bar Associations.

An important modification is the implementation of a point-based system to evaluate a candidate's eligibility for senior advocate designation. The points are allocated as follows

Up to 20 points will be allocated according to the years of practice, with 10 points granted for a minimum of 10 years in practice and an additional point for each subsequent year.
A candidate can accumulate 50 points based on reported and unreported judgments, excluding those that don't establish legal principles, along with pro bono work and expertise in specific legal areas like constitutional law, Inter-State Water Disputes, Criminal law, Arbitration law, Corporate law, Family law, Human Rights, Public Interest Litigation, International law, and women's rights.
A candidate can earn 5 points for publishing academic articles and for their teaching experience, which may include guest lectures conducted at law schools or other legal institutions.
A total of 25 points is assigned based on the interview, which evaluates the applicant's personality and suitability.
The Full Court will make a decision regarding the names of candidates shortlisted for the interview and those cleared by the Committee.

TAGS: Candidates Short-listed Interview Committee Full Court Decision.