Judicial Conduct Office Agrees to Reconsider Complaints Against Employment Judge After Judicial Review Challenge

The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office has agreed to reconsider nine complaints against employment tribunal judge Philip Lancaster after three complainants launched judicial review proceedings against the watchdog. The 10 complaints, spanning a seven-year period, were made against Philip Lancaster, an employment tribunal judge based in Leeds.

The JCIO had previously dismissed most of the allegations against Lancaster without examining them. One complaint against Judge Philip Lancaster was upheld almost four years after it was filed and resulted in a reprimand. Alison McDermott, Dr Hinaa Toheed and Susannah Hickman-Gray launched judicial review proceedings against the JCIO.

The JCIO accepted the arguments of the three judicial review claimants ahead of a court hearing and agreed to reconsider the complaints. BBC News reported that the complainants alleged they suffered bullying, intimidation, banging of the table and/or excessive interruption during employment tribunal hearings presided over by Lancaster.

The JCIO dismissed most complaints on the grounds that the alleged misconduct took place in the context of case management and was beyond its powers to scrutinise.

The JCIO dismissed other complaints because they had been filed without a specific time for when the misconduct had allegedly occurred. Complainants had been denied transcripts of their hearings. In a statement, the JCIO said that it accepted that it erred in rejecting or dismissing a number of complaints that it received about Employment Judge Lancaster in its initial consideration of those complaints under the Judicial Conduct Rules 2023.

Alison McDermott criticised the judicial authorities saying that as they had not taken any meaningful action others may potentially have been exposed to the same conduct. Dr Hinaa Toheed said that if multiple complaints had been made about the same doctor that would have raised alarm bells and led to an investigation.

Dr Hinaa Toheed said that despite repeated concerns about Judge Lancaster's conduct he continued to preside over cases while complainants were battling simply to be heard.

McDermott and Toheed said Judge Barry Clarke had been repeatedly told of an emerging pattern of complaints against Lancaster but took no meaningful action. In a letter to Toheed earlier this year, Judge Barry Clarke wrote that in recommending Lancaster receive formal advice he took into account the judge's previous good record.

“I cannot adequately describe the stress of receiving call after call from different women about Judge Lancaster, describing strikingly similar experiences in his courtroom." — Alison McDermott Alison McDermott said she cannot adequately describe the stress of receiving call after call from different women about Judge Lancaster describing strikingly similar experiences in his courtroom. Alison McDermott said that after four years of raising concerns the JCIO has finally accepted that these complaints must be properly investigated but only after enormous stress, delay and expense. Emily Soothill stated it was the first time the JCIO had had its interpretation of judicial misconduct challenged. Emily Soothill said it was crucial that the JCIO now undertakes a proper and lawful investigation into the numerous complaints which have been raised against Judge Lancaster so that public confidence in how complaints against the judiciary are investigated can start to be restored. BBC News reported that the JCIO had, therefore, agreed to reconsider those complaints.”