header-logo header-logo

Reprimanded judge keeps job

24 April 2008
Issue: 7318 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

News

A judge whose behaviour was adjudged by the Court of Appeal as “wholly inappropriate” when he took part in “extraordinary” exchanges in court, has received an official reprimand. Mr Justice Peter Smith was reported to the Office for Judicial Complaints after showing “undoubted animosity” towards a party in a case before him. The furore arose after a case involving Addleshaw Goddard came before him and he was asked to stand down since the law firm had previously rejected him for a job. The judge, however, refused. Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, and two other appeal judges in Howell & Others v Lees Millais & Others, ruled that Peter Smith J had got “carried away”, had shown “undoubted animosity” and was “intemperate” in the way he handled the application for him to stand down. The judge, the appeal court ruled, should have recused himself.

A spokesman for the Judicial Communications Office confirms that following the investigation under the Judicial Discipline Regulations 2006, the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice had concluded that the judge’s conduct amounted to misconduct. “As a result, the Lord Chief Justice has issued a reprimand to the judge,” he says.

Lord Phillips says:

 

“Both I and the Lord Chancellor value the services of Mr Justice Peter Smith and he has my full confidence.”

 

Louis Flannery, a partner at Howes Percival, says one would hope that Peter Smith J would not be too surprised to have received a reprimand for his conduct in the case.

 

“Although some may have expected him to resign, he did not do so, and is still sitting regularly. Along with his reprimand, he has had the express endorsement of the Lord Chief Justice, so I think a line has indeed been drawn and that he will want to put the whole experience behind him.”

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll