This letter from the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office dismisses a complaint made about a district judge. It summarizes the additional information provided about the complaint and explains that most of the complaint relates to judicial decisions and case management, which cannot be investigated. It dismisses these parts of the complaint. The letter also explains that two other parts of the complaint do not meet the threshold for misconduct. It provides information on appealing decisions and contacting the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman with any complaints about how the complaint was handled.

1. Judicial Conduct Investigations
Office
81 & 82 Queens Building
Royal Courts of Justice
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. 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. 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. 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