The complainant alleged that the presiding judge was biased against men,stating specifically that the judge “had his mind made up”before hearing arguments and that changes in custody were made without reference to evidence or law

20040001 - The complainant alleged that the presiding judge was biased against men, stating specifically that the judge “had his mind made up”before hearing arguments and that changes in custody were made without reference to evidence or law.

In this case, the judge determined that the joint custody he ordered was in the best interest of the complainant’s child.Although leave to appeal was granted, his interim order was left in place, pending the outcome of the appeal.

Comments were sought from the judge at the direction of the Chair of the Judicial Conduct Committee.

The Chairperson advised that although he was unable to comment on the correctness of the judge’s conclusion concerning custody, any legal error on the part of the judge in his reasons for decision would not amount to judicial misconduct. In relation to the specific allegation that the judge “had his mind made up”when he entered the courtroom, the Chair noted that the complainant had provided no support for this allegation other than his interpretation of the judge’s judicial reasoning and decision-making. In the absence of any other evidence, the Chair concluded that this allegation was unsubstantiated.The file was closed.