JCIO Reply

REF 20039/2014
Page 1 of 4
3rd
PART REPLY Judicial Conduct
Investigations Office
81 & 82 Queens
Building
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
27 January 2015 Ref: 20039/2014
Dear Mr Clarke,
RE: Complaint - District Judge (DJ) Asplin
I thank you for your letter dated 26 January 2015 and reply as follows.
This letter deals with your dismissal of my complaint.
For the following reasons I cannot accept your dismissal of my complaints.
1) Rule 21 (b)
You have not replied to my letter 7th
of January in which I requested that
you reconsider your decision not to take these matters any further”. In
that letter I dealt with why I disagreed with your decisions to apply rule
21(b) which I find is in contravention of the Bangalore principles of
Judicial conduct. In contravention of those principles you have once
again applied rule 21(b) to my letter 8th
of January.
2) Rule 21 (f)
The guide I have used as to how a Judge should conduct themselves
and proceedings are the Bangalore principles of judicial conduct and as I
have stated truthfully, I found Judge Aspin’s conduct in contravention of
these principles.
On what basis, have you reached the decision the actions of Judge
Asplin “would not cross threshold of misconduct”?
I also would like a written apology for the suggestion, that what I am
saying is untrue.
“even if true!” “would not warrant any disciplinary action”
3) Rule 21 (h)
I note in your letter that you have not fully addressed point 5 or as you
call it point H. Please could you review your interpretation of this point?
4) You have not addressed point 12 of my letter at all.

REF 20039/2014
Page 2 of 4
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 have decided that Judge Asplin was in contravention of the following
Bangalore 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.

REF 20039/2014
Page 3 of 4
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.

REF 20039/2014
Page 4 of 4
For the above reasons I request that you reconsider your decision to dismiss
my complaints.
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

Judicial Conduct Investigations
Office
81 & 82 Queens Building
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
DX 44450 Strand
T 020 7073 4719
F 020 7073 4725
E inbox@jcio.gsi.gov.uk
http://judicialconduct.judiciary.gov.uk
Mr Gardiner
Email: d09I45@gmail.com
Our ref: 20039/2014
26 January 2015
Dear Mr Gardiner,
Your complaint about District Judge (DJ) Asplin
I am writing further to my letter of 29 December 2014 regarding your complaint dated
28 November 2014 about the conduct of DJ Asplin during a hearing on 21 October
2014. In my letter I requested further information regarding the following point of your
complaint that:
B: DJ Asplin was bullying as:
(ii) he insulted your intelligence
I received a response from you on 7 and 8 January 2015 outlining the information
requested. Thank you for providing the additional information.
This letter explains that having assessed the complaint we cannot take it further and
the complaint has been dismissed. I have provided an explanation for this decision
below. I have also provided advice on how to challenge judicial decisions and
information on the services of the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman.
Further Information you provided
I have listed the examples that you have provided me in relation to point B(ii) which
you say were “an insult to your intelligence and made you feel bullied and distressed.
I have numbered your complaint as:.
D. 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 you may as well have packed up and gone home as you felt there
was no need for you to attend and was wasting your time;
E. You recall DJ Asplin stating orders must be followed otherwise there would be
chaos;
F. During the hearing DJ Asplin shared private pleasantries and facetious
remarks about the use of Latin with the respondent’s representative; he gave
a clear impression a litigant in person has no place in the County Court;

2
G. DJ Asplin stated you had failed to follow his orders;
H. In following his orders, DJ Asplin stated you had provided some useful and
some not so useful information, he added that you had scored 1/10 and then
the unfortunate occurrence when you asked “can we explore the 1 point that
you had scored” he changed the score to 0/10. You persisted and DJ Asplin
started reading through the claim forms he reached a point and said “let’s stop
here there is no medical report within this claim” you corrected him, he rolled
his eyes and in a very dramatic almost comical fashion ruffled through the file
and produced a file that you had submitted entitled “medical records”. In this
folder were extensive medical reports and confidential Dr’s notes for his eyes
only, DJ Asplin asked the respondent’s 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;
I. You stated that the Secretary of State had found you had suffered personal
injury at the premises of the respondents, DJ Asplin replied your pension had
nothing to do with these proceedings “this is a Court of Law”;
J. The hearing never got any further the Judge insisted the claim was struck out;
K. You stated that you did not understand, it was beyond your capability to
understand what DJ Asplin was asking for, he ignored your requests until
finally referring to the respondents representative who quoted some obscure
case law;
L. DJ Asplin then summarised with threats your case would fail and you would
have to pay substantial costs the claim is struck out;
M. You asked DJ Asplin why he had ordered you all the way from France to tell
you the claim had been struck out, when he could have just sent an order DJ
Asplin’s reply was that he felt it would be better if the issues were dealt with in
person;
N. You requested the written reasons for his decision and DJ Asplin refused
stating “this is not a magistrate’s Court”. The claim was struck out;
O. It is clear DJ Asplin’s written reasons bear no resemblance to those he gave at
the hearing; and
P. The final insult was DJ Asplin refused a simple request for clarification of point
13 above.
Reasons why your complaint is dismissed
Rule 21(b) of the Judicial Conduct (Judicial and other office holders) Rules state that
the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) must dismiss a complaint if it relates
to judicial decision and/or case management.
I have concluded that the further information you have provided in your email of 8
January 2015 at points D, E, G, J, K, l, M, N, O and P relate to judicial decision
and/or case management and are therefore dismissed in accordance with Rule

3
21(b). Judges are entitled to decide what evidence or information they want to take
into account or find relevant in the hearing as part of the decision making process.
This extends to what a Judge chooses to take into account when formulating a
judgment. As a matter of basic principle, it is for the judge to decide how to apply the
law and conduct the proceedings before them in court, subject to the law.
In respect of points O and P of your further information, that (O) DJ Asplin’s written
reasons bear no resemblance to those he gave at the hearing, and (P) he refused a
simple request for clarification of point (O), these are dismissed in accordance with
Rule 21(b) above. An important part of the judicial function is to determine how to
proceed with a case and making a judgment and how the final order is written . In
regards to DJ Asplin refusing your request for clarification, it was his decision to
refuse your request and is therefore dismissed in accordance with Rule 21(b) above,
The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice have no powers to review the
decisions Judges make. Judges carry out their duties having regard only to the facts
and arguments which are brought before them, and it is their task to apply the law in
that light. Judicial decisions are for Judges and Judges alone. They are not
answerable for their decisions in the same way a government minister is: if a Judges
decision appears wrong, the only course is to appeal.
The appropriate way to challenge a Judge’s decision is through the appeal process,
although it is not guaranteed that there would be a right of appeal. Alternatively, you
may be able to challenge the decision by judicial review. As members of staff at the
JCIO are not legally trained we advise that you seek legal advice in order to find out
what your options are in relation to an appeal and how to proceed.
You may find it helpful to seek advice from a solicitor, law centre or the Citizen’s
Advice Bureau (http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk). The Civil Legal Service (CLS) – a
Government organisation – might also be able to help. This service helps put people
in touch with sources of legal advice in their area. Further details about the CLS can
be found on their website (https://www.gov.uk/civil-legal-advice).
In respect of points f and i, Rule 21(f) of the Judicial Conduct (Judicial and other
office holders) Rules 2014 states that the JCIO must dismiss a complaint if, even if
true would not require any disciplinary action to be taken. I note that you say that DJ
Asplin shared private pleasantries and facetious remarks about the use of Latin with
the respondents representative and gave a clear impression a litigant in person had
no place in the County Court. Whilst you may have been unhappy with the actions of
DJ Asplin during this part of the hearing and this led you to feel that DJ Asplin gave a
clear impression that a litigant in person had no place in Court, the actions you have
complained about would not cross the threshold of misconduct and relate more to the
judge’s decisions. I have therefore dismissed points f and i in accordance with Rule
21(f) above.
Rule 21(h) of the Judicial Conduct Judicial and other office holders) Rules 2014
states that the JCIO must dismiss a complaint if it raises a matter which has already
been dealt with, whether under these Rules of otherwise, and does not present any
new material evidence. In respect of point H of you further information, in my letter of
29 December 2014 I dismissed the part of your complaint that DJ Asplin “rolled his
eyes” in accordance with Rule 21(f) as it would not cross the threshold of

4
misconduct. I have therefore dismissed point H in accordance with Rule 21(h) as this
matter has already been dealt with.
Also, within point H, you state that DJ Asplin “in a dramatic almost comical fashion
ruffled through the file and produced a file entitled medical records” Although you
may have felt unhappy with DJ Asplin’s action when he looked through the file for the
medical notes this is not evidence of misconduct. I have therefore dismissed this
point in accordance with Rule 21(f) above in that the action complained of, even if
true would not warrant any disciplinary action to be taken.
Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman
If you are unhappy about my handling of your complaint, you should contact the
Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman, Sir John Brigstocke KCB. The
Ombudsman can consider complaints about how I have handled your complaint, but
he does not have the power to investigate your original complaint to the JCIO.
The Ombudsman will consider a complaint if you write to him within 28 days of our
decision. After this time, he will consider whether he is able to investigate it. You
can contact the Ombudsman:
• in writing at: 9th Floor Tower, 9.53, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ;
• by e-mail at headofoffice@jaco.gsi.gov.uk; and
• by telephone on 020 3334 2900.
For further information about the Ombudsman see www.judicialombudsman.gov.uk.
If you require anything further, please contact me
Yours sincerely,
Steve Clarke
Caseworker – Judicial Conduct Investigations Office

REF 20039/2014
Page 1 of 6
2nd
81 & 82 Queens
Building
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
08 January 2015 Ref: 20039/2014
Dear Mr Clarke,
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.

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.

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.

REF 20039/2014
Page 4 of 6
In Summary
conduct concur with these documents.
I believe that Judge Asplin was in contravention of the following principles.
Value 1:
INDEPENDENCE
Application:
Value 2:
IMPARTIALITY
Application:
Value 3:
INTEGRITY
Application:
done.

REF 20039/2014
Page 5 of 6
Value 4:
PROPRIETY
Application:
Value 5:
EQUALITY
Application:
of such duties.
Value 6:
judicial office.
Application:
judicial duties.

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.
Yours sincerely,
Douglas Gardiner

REF 20039/2014
Page 1 of 5
81 & 82 Queens
Building
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
07 January 2015 Ref: 20039/2014
Dear Mr Clarke,
I thank you for your letter dated 29 December 2014 and in part reply as follows.
This letter deals with the parts of my complaint you have stated “cannot be
taken any further”. I will deal with your request for further information in a
separate letter.
My complaint
I agree with your listed items as below which relate to my letter of the 28
November;
A. The reasons for strike out of your case given by DJ Asplin in his orders
are not the same as the reasons he gave at the hearing;
(i) he continuously rolled his eyes and
C. You requested an agenda for the hearing which was refused.
Note: Just for clarification I refer to the document Judicial Conduct March
2013 at page 30 the word “Bullying” is as I understand and have understood
its meaning throughout my life.
“Bullying” carries its normal meaning. It consists of conduct that is offensive, intimidating,
malicious and/or insulting and which has the purpose or effect of undermining, humiliating,
and/or frightening another person. It may amount to a misuse or abuse of power. Unlike
harassment and victimisation, the conduct need not be related to one of the “protected
characteristics” of the person against whom it is directed.
I disagree with your decision that there are parts of my complaint that cannot be
taken further and I have explained my reasons as follows.

REF 20039/2014
Page 2 of 5
For A you replied
In respect of point A, you state that you wish to appeal about the
orders made by DJ Asplin. Rule 21(b) of the Judicial (judicial and
other office holders) Rules 2014 state that the Judicial Conduct
Investigation Office (JCIO) cannot investigate a complaint that relates
to judicial decision and/or judicial case management. I have therefore
dismissed point A of your complaint in accordance with Rule 21(b)
above.
The Lord Chancellor and The Lord Chief Justice have no powers to
review the decisions Judges make. Judges carry out their duties
having regard only to the facts and arguments which are brought
before them, and it is their task to apply the law in that light. Judicial
decisions are for Judges and Judges alone. They are not answerable
for their decisions in the same way a government minister is: if a
Judges decision appears wrong, the only course is to appeal.
My answer:
conduct concur with these documents, however from my experiences and those
of others I can easily conclude that the international and national expectations
of judicial conduct are being abused daily by the members of the Judiciary of
England, Scotland and Wales.
To highlight this point, there is a serious flaw in rule 21(b) members of the
judiciary have the established right to argue that any decision they make is part
of the judicial process, so it is an impossible task to investigate mal practice and
poor conduct with such a perverse rule.
I have discovered what this rule means when raising concerns in particular
about the conduct of Judge Elias, who refused to complete or acknowledge a
discrimination questionnaire.
I have also raised concerns of the bullying behaviour of REJ Judge Parkin and
asked my case to be referred to the Chairman of Employment Tribunals
England & Wales the REJ’s judicial decision was to refuse my request; however
now reading the Guide his refusal was incorrect.
The appeal process as you describe, is pointless until I have the clarifications
as I requested in my original e-mails dated 19/06/2014, 14/11/2014 &
28/11/2014.
A Judge, whose conduct is perceived as being in contravention of the
Bangalore principles, under human rights automatically loses the rights of an
independent judicial official and should be suspended from duty pending your
investigation. Rule 21(b) does not apply in this case.

REF 20039/2014
Page 3 of 5
For B(i) you replied
In respect of point b (i) Rule 21 (f) states that the Judicial Conduct
Investigation Office (JCIO) must dismiss a complaint even if true
would not require any disciplinary action to be taken. Your complaint
that DJ Asplin rolled his eyes would not cross the threshold of
misconduct and would therefore not require any disciplinary action to
be taken so is therefore dismissed under Rule 21 (f).
My answer:
I clarify my point Judge Asplin repeatedly rolled his eyes, his body language
toward me was appalling and I found this behaviour directed at me disturbing
and in contravention of the following Bangalore principles of judicial conduct.
Value 1:
INDEPENDENCE
Application:
Value 2:
IMPARTIALITY
Application:
Value 3:
INTEGRITY
Application:
done.

REF 20039/2014
Page 4 of 5
Value 4:
PROPRIETY
Application:
Value 5:
EQUALITY
Application:
of such duties.
Value 6:
judicial office.
Application:
judicial duties.

REF 20039/2014
Page 5 of 5
For C you replied
Finally in respect of point C, the matter you complain about is
administered by the Court staff. If you feel that there has been some
maladministration regarding your request for an agenda for the
hearing you should contact the Court manager in the first instance.
I disagree, the hearing was ordered by the Judge for a maximum of 45 minutes
my presence was ordered. It was beyond my capability to 2nd
guess or
understand what the Judge had in mind for that time span, I was travelling from
France especially for the hearing it was for these reasons I requested an
agenda. I cannot speak for the Court manager however we were all under the
judge’s influence, direction or control, referring again to the Bangalore principles
in particular value 6.6. It was an incompetent act by the Judge not to provide an
agenda and if a deliberate act - bullying.
Value 6:
Principle:
Competence and diligence are prerequisites to the due performance of judicial office.
Application:
For the above reasons I request that you reconsider your decision not to take
these matters any further.
I need to 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.
Yours sincerely,
Douglas Gardiner

Judicial Conduct Investigations
Office
81 & 82 Queens Building
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
DX 44450 Strand
T 020 7073 4719
F 020 7073 4725
E inbox@jcio.gsi.gov.uk
http://judicialconduct.judiciary.gov.uk
Mr Gardiner
Email: d09I45@gmail.com
Our ref: 20039/2014
29 December 2014
Dear Mr Gardiner,
Your complaint about District Judge (DJ) Asplin
I am writing further to your complaint dated 28 November 2014 about the conduct of
DJ Asplin during a hearing on 21 October 2014. I also refer to your email dated 18
December 2014 regarding the email from my colleague acknowledging receipt of
your complaint and notifying you that you would receive a detailed reply within 15
working days, taking the Christmas holidays into account the 15 working days
deadline is today.
The 15 working days mentioned relates to the time taken to initially assess a
complaint by a caseworker. In this time a complaint is assessed and the caseworker
will write to a complainant to advise them of the next steps they intend to take or to
dismiss a complaint.
I have investigated your complaint and I require some further information from you
about part of it. I have explained what further information I require in the Further
Steps section towards the end of this letter. Unfortunately, there are parts of your
complaint that I cannot take any further and I have explained this decision below.
Your complaint
In summary, you complain that;
A. The reasons for strike out of your case given by DJ Asplin in his orders are not
the same as the reasons he gave at the hearing;
(i) he continuously rolled his eyes and
C. You requested an agenda for the hearing which was refused.
If I have missed anything in my summary of your complaint you feel is necessary for
me to consider as part of my investigation, please do not hesitate to inform me in
your reply.

2
Reasons why part of your complaint is dismissed
In respect of point A, you state that you wish to appeal about the orders made by DJ
Asplin. Rule 21(b) of the Judicial (judicial and other office holders) Rules 2014 state
that the Judicial Conduct Investigation Office (JCIO) cannot investigate a complaint
that relates to judicial decision and/or judicial case management. I have therefore
dismissed point A of your complaint in accordance with Rule 21(b) above.
The Lord Chancellor and The Lord Chief Justice have no powers to review the
decisions Judges make. Judges carry out their duties having regard only to the facts
and arguments which are brought before them, and it is their task to apply the law in
that light. Judicial decisions are for Judges and Judges alone. They are not
answerable for their decisions in the same way a government minister is: if a Judges
decision appears wrong, the only course is to appeal.
The appropriate way to challenge a Judge’s decision is through the appeal process,
although it is not guaranteed that there would be a right of appeal. Alternatively, you
may be able to challenge the decision by judicial review. As members of staff at the
JCIO are not legally trained you may wish to seek legal advice in order to find out
what your options are in relation to an appeal and how to proceed.
You may find it helpful to seek advice from a solicitor, law centre or the Citizen’s
Advice Bureau (http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk). The Civil Legal Service (CLS) – a
Government organisation – might also be able to help. This service helps put people
in touch with sources of legal advice in their area. Further details about the CLS can
be found on their website (https://www.gov.uk/civil-legal-advice).
In respect of point b (i) Rule 21 (f) states that the Judicial Conduct Investigation
Office (JCIO) must dismiss a complaint even if true would not require ant disciplinary
action to be taken. Your complaint that DJ Asplin rolled his eyes would not cross the
threshold of misconduct and would therefore not require any disciplinary action to be
taken so is therefore dismissed under Rule 21 (f).
Finally in respect of point C, the matter you complain about is administered by the
Court staff. If you feel that there has been some maladministration regarding your
request for an agenda for the hearing you should contact the Court manager in the
first instance.
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.

3
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.
Please provide this information by 21 January 2015. If you do not provide the
information by the date given your complaint may be dismissed.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Clarke
Caseworker – Judicial Conduct Investigations Office

JCIO Reply

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to JCIO Reply

More from Douglas GARDINER

Recently uploaded

JCIO Reply