The complainant claimed that the judge’s ruling was unfair and that it did not reflect the true situation in which the complainant found himself.

webid-20150000

The complainant claimed that the judge’s ruling was unfair and that it did not reflect the true situation in which the complainant found himself. In this case, the complainant was claiming monetary compensation from his former landlord for perceived health damages caused by the poor maintenance of his residence. The complainant insisted that an investigation regarding the judge should be conducted.

The complainant was advised by the Council that his complaint was concerning the assessment made by the judge based on the material before him, and concerned his exercise of judicial discretion when presiding over the hearing and rendering his final decision. The complainant was advised that the mandate of the Council includes the review of any complaint made about the conduct of a federally appointed judge. As the Council is not a court and cannot intervene in court matters nor can it attempt to change a judge’s decision, the matter was closed.

Back