The document is a conduct complaint form used to file a complaint with the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman about how a judicial body handled a previous complaint. It requests information about the complainant, provides guidance on the ombudsman's limited role in investigating process rather than outcomes, and requires the complainant to fully specify why they believe the handling of their original complaint failed to meet reasonable standards. The complainant explains they are dissatisfied that their previous complaint was deemed outside the ombudsman's remit to investigate due to judicial independence, when it actually concerned a judge's failure to respond to a questionnaire, which they argue represents an abuse of power. They hope the ombudsman can establish certain principles including that

1. Conduct Complaint Form
Use this form to particularise the details of your complaint to the Ombudsman
about how the Office for Judicial Complaints (OJC), a Tribunal President or
Magistrates Advisory Committee handled your complaint. You can complete this
form online or by sending to us at the address at the end of this form.
Guidance notes
1. The Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the OJC, Tribunal President or Magistrates Advisory
Committee, as appropriate, handled your complaint to them correctly. You must have made your
complaint about the judicial office holders’ personal conduct to one of these bodies in the first instance.
2. The Ombudsman cannot investigate the outcome of a complaint about a judge, tribunal member or a
magistrate; he can only look at the process that organisation adopted when handling your complaint. If
you do not think that your complaint was handled according to their published procedures, then you can
complain to the Ombudsman.
3. The Ombudsman needs your complaint to be fully particularised, providing evidence to support each
element of your complaint. You must make your complaint to him clear and succinct and do so in the
space provided in this form. We will contact you if we require further information.
4. You must state exactly why you believe the OJC, Tribunal President or Magistrates’ Advisory Committee’s
handling of your complaint fell short of the standards you could reasonably expect. You may, for example,
believe that it took too long to investigate your complaint, that you were not kept updated as to progress,
that insufficient attempts were made to independently verify what happened during the hearing or that
aspects of your complaint were ignored. Please provide specific details to illustrate your complaint. For
example, if you believe that not all the issues you raised were considered you would need to set out
exactly what issues were not considered.
5. You must make your complaint within 28 days of receiving the letter from the OJC, Tribunal President or
Magistrates’ Advisory Committee, notifying you of their decision about your complaint. The Ombudsman
is not required under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to consider complaints outside this period, and
will only do so in exceptional circumstances. These should be explained in section 4 of this form.
1. Your Details (Please complete in BLOCK CAPITALS)
Mr Mrs Miss Ms Other (please specify):
Name:
Address:
Postcode:
Email:
Contact phone number(s):
2. Permission
If the Ombudsman decides that he is able to deal with your complaint, he will need your permission
to contact the OJC, a Tribunal President or Magistrates’ Advisory Committee. In most cases it will be
impractical to proceed with an investigation if you withhold permission.
I confirm that I am content for the Judicial Appointments and Conduct
Ombudsman’s Office to contact the OJC, Tribunal President or
Magistrates’ Advisory Committee about my complaint
Yes
No
I have read and understood the Conduct Leaflet and understand that the
Ombudsman can only look at the way in which my complaint was handled
by the OJC, Tribunal President or Magistrates’ Advisory Committee.
Yes
No
3. Your signature
Signature: Date:
DOUGLAS IAIN GARDINER
1 PLACE ST JEAN LOT 10
CHATEAU-GONTIER, FRANCE 53200
D09L45@GMAIL.COM
07 97 31 72 405
s
s
11th FEB 2014

2. 4. Your complaint
Your complaint must be set out concisely on this page only. You must give specific details, illustrating
exactly why you believe the OJC, Tribunal President or Magistrates’ Advisory Committee’s handling of
your complaint fell short of the standards you could reasonably expect.
The Ombudsman will investigate the issues that you provide below if he considers your complaint
warrants investigation. He will not be able to deal with your complaint unless you particularise your
concerns on this form. You may provide supporting documents if necessary.
5. What are you hoping to achieve from your complaint?
This form can also be found on our website at www.judicialombudsman.gov.uk and can be downloaded and
sent to us by email to headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
If you wish to complete this form by hand, please send it to the Judicial Appointments and Conduct
Ombudsman, 9th Floor, The Tower, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ.
If you have a disability, if English is not your first language, or if you need advice on how to complete this form
please contact us on 020 3334 2900 or email headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk
I write to you to to express my dissatisfaction at the handling of my complaint.
For my complaint is not as stated by the investigator
“I have found that your complaint is about an example of LJ Elias’ judicial decision making. As part of his
judicial function, LJ Elias is entitled to decide whether he considers it appropriate to complete your form or
enter into correspondence with any party, this decision would not be subject to the scrutiny of the JCIO. It is
for this reason that I cannot take your complaint any further.”
It is that he has failed to respond to the questionnaire, a copy of which is attached.
In essence the failure to investigate my complaint of the conduct of the Judiciary used by the investigator is
of "judicial independence" basically you cannot investigate the complaint because you are powerless to do
so.
In my opinion that the conduct of Lord Elias is inappropriate for a person in such high office, completing or
delegating the completion of this form should have been a formality. To refuse to complete the form is an
abuse of his power and position and by not taking action he encourages exclusivity or discrimination to
those in power, this conduct is unacceptable and amounts to bullying.
But by virtue of section 138 of the Equality Act 2010, these questions and any answers are admissible as
evidence in proceedings under the Act . A court or tribunal may draw an inference from a failure to reply
within 8 weeks
It is for these reasons that I complain about the conduct of Judge Elias
Not as suggest by the investigator
1) An understanding that judicial independence does not exclude the judiciary from following legislation
2) Establish that the judiciary are not untouchable or above the law.
3) Confirm that the judiciary do not abuse their position of power
4) Establish that the judiciary give fair judgment upon underrepresented individuals
5) Increase the powers of the ombudsman to investigate judicial independence
6) Lord Elias completes the questionnaire
7) A judicial review of the case 1400500/2011
Print FormSubmit by Email