The complainants claimed that after they filed a Notice of Application and a response to a bank, they did not receive any response submissions within the timeline provided by the Rules of the Court.

webid-20150000

The complainants claimed that after they filed a Notice of Application and a response to a bank, they did not receive any response submissions within the timeline provided by the Rules of the Court. They then filed a requisition for default judgment against this bank, which was dismissed by a judge. The complainants claimed that they were fearful of retaliation, feared for their physical safety, and feared of having their property unlawfully taken without just cause and with no recourse.

The complainants alleged that during the judge’s response to them, the judge escalated into anger and he “exploded all over the courtroom” leaving the complainants in shock and unable to ask questions before he stormed out of the courtroom. It was noted that judge’s general duty, whether the parties appearing are represented or self-represented, is to listen fairly but, when necessary, to assert firm control over the proceeding and, to act with appropriate firmness to maintain an atmosphere of dignity, equality and order in the courtroom.

They were advised that the Council cannot review a court’s decision, and if a party is dissatisfied with the outcome of a court proceeding, the appropriate recourse is to appeal the decision to the appropriate appellate level. The Council concluded that the complaint fell outside its mandate, and the matter was closed.

Back