Judicial Conduct Complaint

1. REF 20039/2014
Page 1 of 6
2nd
PART REPLY Judicial Conduct
Investigations Office
81 & 82 Queens
Building
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
08 January 2015 Ref: 20039/2014
Dear Mr Clarke,
RE: Complaint - District Judge (DJ) Asplin
I thank you for your letter dated 29 December 2014 and part reply as follows.
This letter deals with the final part of my complaint you have called “further
steps” and deals with your request for further information.
My complaint
I agree with your listed item as below which relates to my letter of the 28
November;
B. DJ Asplin was bullying as:
(ii) insulted your intelligence
Note: Just for clarification my understanding of the phrase “to insult
someone’s intelligence”.
is to tell them something they clearly already know; to imply that they are incompetent or
stupid; to speak or act condescendingly to them; or to show a lack of respect for their
intelligence by word or by deed.
You asked
Further Steps
I require some further information from you in order to investigate the
remaining point of your complaint.
I would be grateful, in relation to point B (ii) if you could provide
examples of the words or phrases or actions taken by DJ Asplin
which would confirm your complaint that he insulted your intelligence.
I would also appreciate it if you could confirm at what point during the
hearing this incident occurred.
You do not need to provide a verbatim account of what the Judge
said I only require enough detail to help me put the incident into
context so that I can further assess your complaint. We do not
require you to obtain a transcript of the proceedings.

2. REF 20039/2014
Page 2 of 6
The following are the outstanding points I recall clearly at this moment in time,
that I feel were an insult to my intelligence.
1) After introductions Judge Asplin’s first reference to the case was
“Gentlemen we are looking at a struck out claim” at this point prejudged 2
or 3 minutes into the hearing I may as well have packed up and gone
home I felt there was no need for me to attend and I was wasting my
time.
2) I recall him stating orders must be followed otherwise there would be
chaos.
3) During the hearing he shared private pleasantries and facetious remarks
about the use of Latin with the respondent’s representative; he gave a
clear impression a LIP has no place in the County Court.
4) He stated I had failed to follow his orders.
5) In following his orders, He stated I had provided some useful and some
not so useful information he added that I had scored 1/10 and then the
unfortunate occurrence when I asked “can we explore the 1 point that I
have scored” he changed the score to 0/10. I persisted and he started
reading through the claim forms he reached a point and said “let’s stop
here there is no medical report with this claim” I corrected him, he rolled
his eyes and in a very dramatic almost comic fashion ruffled through the
file and produced a file that I had submitted entitled “medical records” In
this folder were extensive medical reports and confidential Dr Notes for
his eyes only, he asked the respondents’ representative if he had seen
these the rep replied yes – he was wrong the rep had seen some but not
all as they were confidential and reserved for the Judge and potential
disclosure.
6) I stated the Secretary of State had found I had suffered personal injury at
the premises of the respondents, he replied your pension has nothing to
do with these proceedings “this is a Court of Law”.
7) The hearing never got any further the Judge insisted the claim was
struck out.
8) I stated I do not understand, it is beyond my capability to understand
what he is asking for, he ignored my requests until finally referring to the
respondents representative who quoted some obscure case law.

3. REF 20039/2014
Page 3 of 6
9) The Judge then summarised with threats your case would fail and you
would have to pay substantial costs the claim is struck out.
10) I asked him why he had ordered me all the way from France to tell me
the claim had been struck out, when he could have just sent an order?
His reply was he felt it would be better if the issues were dealt with in
person.
11) I request the written reasons for his decision and the Judge refused
stating “this is not a magistrate’s court”. The claim is struck out.
12) I left the court feeling bullied, distressed and as a result crying which I
had not done for many months.
13) It is clear his written reasons bear no resemblance to those he gave at
the hearing.
14) The final insult he refused a simple request for clarification of point 13
above.
These points were all insults to my intelligence the rules and orders seem very
simple and straight forward to me I complied with them as far as my capability
and understanding allow, in preparation of my claim I used extensively the CAB
leaflet 4 “going to court” and the Civil Justice council document “A guide to
bringing and defending a small claim” I also printed “practice direction 16
particulars of claim” to use as a check list. I have co-operated at all times with
the court services over a period of 7 months I submitted my claim forms 9 times
with various successful appeals against their refusals to accept my forms.

4. REF 20039/2014
Page 4 of 6
In Summary
I have read and studied the Bangalore principles of judicial conduct and the
Guide to judicial conduct of March 2013, my expectations of reasonable judicial
conduct concur with these documents.
I believe that Judge Asplin was in contravention of the following principles.
Value 1:
INDEPENDENCE
Principle: Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to the rule of law and a fundamental
guarantee of a fair trial. A judge shall therefore uphold and exemplify judicial independence in
both its individual and institutional aspects.
Application:
“1.6 A judge shall exhibit and promote high standards of judicial conduct in order to
reinforce public confidence in the judiciary which is fundamental to the maintenance of
judicial independence. “
Value 2:
IMPARTIALITY
Principle: Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office. It applies
not only to the decision itself but also to the process by which the decision is made.
Application:
2.1 A judge shall perform his or her judicial duties without favour, bias or prejudice.
2.2 A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and
enhances the confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the
impartiality of the judge and of the judiciary. “
Value 3:
INTEGRITY
Principle: Integrity is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office.
Application:
3.1 A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct is above reproach in the view of a
reasonable observer.
3.2 The behaviour and conduct of a judge must reaffirm the people's faith in the
integrity of the judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be
done.

5. REF 20039/2014
Page 5 of 6
Value 4:
PROPRIETY
Principle: Propriety, and the appearance of propriety, are essential to the performance
of all of the activities of a judge.
Application:
4.2. As a subject of constant public scrutiny, a judge must accept personal restrictions that
might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and
willingly. In particular, a judge shall conduct himself or herself in a way that is
consistent with the dignity of the judicial office.
4.6 A judge, like any other citizen, is entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association
and assembly, but in exercising such rights, a judge shall always conduct himself or
herself in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the
impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
Value 5:
EQUALITY
Principle: Ensuring equality of treatment to all before the courts is essential to the
due performance of the judicial office.
Application:
5.1 A judge shall be aware of, and understand, diversity in society and differences
arising from various sources, including but not limited to race, colour, sex, religion,
national origin, caste, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, social and
economic status and other like causes ("irrelevant grounds").
5.2 A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct,
manifest bias or prejudice towards any person or group on irrelevant grounds.
5.3 A judge shall carry out judicial duties with appropriate consideration for all
persons, such as the parties, witnesses, lawyers, court staff and judicial colleagues,
without differentiation on any irrelevant ground, immaterial to the proper performance
of such duties.
5.4 A judge shall not knowingly permit court staff or others subject to the judge's
influence, direction or control to differentiate between persons concerned, in a matter
before the judge, on any irrelevant ground.
Value 6:
COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Principle: Competence and diligence are prerequisites to the due performance of
judicial office.
Application:
6.6 A judge shall maintain order and decorum in all proceedings before the court and
be patient, dignified and courteous in relation to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers
and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity. The judge shall require
similar conduct of legal representatives, court staff and others subject to the judge's
influence, direction or control.
6.7 A judge shall not engage in conduct incompatible with the diligent discharge of
judicial duties.

6. REF 20039/2014
Page 6 of 6
I clarify, it is my duty to assist you with your investigation, I did not personally
complain to your department about the conduct of Judge Asplin my actions are
not as rule 21(d) vexatious.
This document is a statement of truth.
Yours sincerely,
Douglas Gardiner