* "The House of Lords seemed to me to work well enough and there was no need to spend £35 million plus on a new building and a new administrative system when government is awash with property . . . " John Davidson, general counsel, SAB Miller

* "Yes it will become more powerful - a new confidence to exert influence supported by the Human Rights Act." Stephen Lawson, Forshaws Davies Ridgway

* "Whether it is worth the £60 million cost is debatable but despite its 133 years in the House of Lords it was all a bit bizarre operating from a small committee room and giving judgment in an otherwise empty chamber of the House of Lords and constitutionally it made no sense having the highest court operating in the legislature." David Hooper, Reynolds Porter Chamberlain

*"It will assist (cosmetically at least, but much more than that at best) in reflecting a clear delineation of powers as between the legislature and the judiciary and will help to underscore in the mind of the public at large the proper separation of those powers . . . may have other unintended consequences in terms of bolstering the independence of the final court of appeal in the land as the true defenders of our unwritten constitution." Rob Fell, Travers Smith

* "A natural step and one that is long overdue." Julian Pike, Farrer & Co

* "Yes, the change is worthwhile, to give status to the highest court in the country and permit it the total perception of independence from Parliament. Important as those cosmetic changes are, I do not believe that the court will become more fearless than it has shown itself to be in the past." Andrew Mitchell, QC

* "A Supreme Court carries with it a recognised authority and supervisory function that is absent from the former appellate committee." Jonathan Caplan, QC

* "I hope it makes it easier for judges to stand up to the legislature in the way the US Supreme Court can do by adopting the new title and being entirely separate from the House of Lords, which does sound old fashioned." Richard Linsell, Addleshaw Goddard

* "At a time when the legislature have been producing large rafts of law, some of it given little time for scrutiny in Parliament, the Supreme Court will have a continuing responsibility to consider carefully the efficacy of the law." John Cooper, 25 Bedford Row

* "The new court will streng then the judiciary and will help preserve the British tradition of judicial independence from the executive . . . this independence, together with the Supreme Court's new home outside the Palace of Westminister, will mean that the justices will not shy away from challenging the government of the day." James Stewart, Manches.

* "Important that the highest court should be seen to be entirely separate from Parliament and should be housed in suitable premises . . . it is likely to be more willing to flex its muscles and challenge the Government of the day." Mark Howard, QC

* "The Supreme Court justices will be no more powerful than the law lords are now." Michael Gouriet, Withers

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure