The complainant requested that a judge’s conduct be reviewed as the judge seemed inexperienced, allegedly did not properly assess evidence and ignored some of the evidence in his estate matter.

webid-20150000

The complainant requested that a judge’s conduct be reviewed as the judge seemed inexperienced, allegedly did not properly assess evidence and ignored some of the evidence in his estate matter. The complainant also alleged that he had to wait almost seven months for the judge to issue a judgment. The complainant also requested that the assets of the estate be frozen until a thorough investigation is completed.

The Council concluded that the complainant disagreed with the judgement; however, the complaint does not relate to its mandate. The Council indicated in its response to the complainant that a disagreement with the judgement is not indicative of misconduct. The Council also clarified that issuing a decision three weeks after the recommended six month guideline is not considered an extraordinary delay and does not raise an issue of judicial misconduct. The matter was closed.

Back