The International Association of Amateur Heralds

https://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/news-grants/newsletter/item/159-january-2019-newsletter-no-57

No image unfortunately, but a reference to the recent grant of arms to Sir John Anthony Dyson Kt PC called Lord Dyson (my italics). It seems that, by Royal Warrant, all Justices of the Supreme Court (of the United Kingdom) are entitled to the judicial style and title "Lord or Lady" for life. Sir John retired in 2012 but thus remains Lord Dyson. We may surmise that his new arms do not however sport supporters, a Peer's helm, or a Baron's coronet ... or do they?

https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/pr_1013.pdf

Apparently Lord Dyson's paternal grandparents were Lithuanian and his mother Bulgarian, so, who knows, there may be some interesting charges in the arms.

Wouldn't it be nice if the College of Arms included a picture of each new grant in their newsletter! The Letters Patent are after all public documents.

Chris Green wrote:We may surmise that his new arms do not however sport supporters, a Peer's helm, or a Baron's coronet ... or do they?

Your supposition is correct, these are mere courtesy titles and therefore they do not warrant the trappings of Lords of Parliament (peers).

Martin Goldstraw wrote:
Your supposition is correct, these are mere courtesy titles and therefore they do not warrant the trappings of Lords of Parliament (peers).

But (this is a question), lords of appeal in ordinary, back before the Supreme Court was established, were peers and thus entitled to the trappings, correct?

But (this is a question), lords of appeal in ordinary, back before the Supreme Court was established, were peers and thus entitled to the trappings, correct?

True. The fundamental constitutional point that resulted in the creation of the Supreme Court was the perceived need to totally separate the judicial from the executive/legislative. It was decided that Supreme Court Justices, unlike Law Lords, might not be peers since their overriding judicial responsibilities might be considered compromised were they to sit in the Lords (even though they would be cross-benchers - not beholden to a political party). (Imagine US Supreme Court Justices sitting in the Senate.) The point is abstruse in the extreme. But I believe the balance of legal opinion that the risk of a Law Lords ruling being overruled by the ECHR on the grounds of their triple roll was real.

Interesting how successfully we've managed to export Madisonian principles of the separation of powers. I'll withhold comment on the irony of the European mainland countries lecturing Britain on the internal arrangements necessary for the running of a free country.

April 2019

https://mailchi.mp/57e20bdf993b/college-of-arms-newsletter?e=aa2b0cc8ab

The arms of Dale Andrew Potter are (literally) a good illustration of the dangers of the proliferation of bleu celeste. Firstly the bleu celeste has been rendered so pale as to appear off-white. Secondly the herald (who is the miscreant?) has placed upon the field a stag argent. So much for the fridge test; so much for arms being distinguishable on a battlefield.

The creation of blue celest as an heraldic tincture was, quite possibly, a mistake however, it does exist and here its use along with an Argent charge is made worse by the artist who has made it too pale. It may just be possible to forgive the herald who may have been bullied (heavily persuaded) for some unknown reason to allow it however, once granted it could have been painted in a more distinct way. Of course, had the herald been successful in persuading the petitioner to accept Azure, all would be well. Even if the petitioner had Royal Air Force connections, blue can and does still represent the sky and Azure is armorially far better.

I wonder if the image of the Potter arms is taken from the final product. The artwork looks rather rough in places, and the pean chief ought to be black, but looks grey.