Coroner: Formal warning
An assistant coroner overheard describing a barrister’s submission as “bollocks” and a judge who took 16 months to produce a ruling have been disciplined for misconduct.
Assistant Coroner Heath Westerman received a formal warning after an investigation by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) into a complaint made on behalf of a party to an inquest into the death of her son.
The complainant alleged that, following a hearing, she had overheard the coroner describe her barrister’s submission as “bollocks” and that the duration of the inquest listing was “ridiculous”. He was also alleged to have said “Who do these people think they are?”
The coroner accepted the first allegation. The JCIO reported: “This, he stated, was due to frustration caused by a poor submission by the complainant’s barrister.
“The discussion, with two members of staff, took place in a private area at a time when he believed the complainant had left the building. He nevertheless accepted that his language was inappropriate and intemperate, for which he was very sorry.”
But he denied the other two allegations, adding that he had been under “considerable pressure of work at the time”.
He had apologised to the complainant straightaway, reported himself to his senior coroner and recused himself from the case.
The investigating judge found that Mr Westerman had said something implying that the duration of the listing was ridiculous, which was “both inappropriate and prejudicial”, but that he had not said “Who do they think they are?”
The Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, and Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood agreed with the judge that a formal warning was “a reasonable and proportionate sanction”; they took into consideration that he had a previously unblemished conduct record.
Meanwhile, Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Catherine Burton has received formal advice after a JCIO investigation found that the 16-month delay in provide parties with a judgment on costs amounted to misconduct.
“Whilst the [investigating] judge found that several emails from the parties chasing the judgment were not referred to Judge Burton, there were still sufficient opportunities for the judge to have prepared her judgment in a timelier manner.
“Judge Burton was aware that the judgment was outstanding and had kept the papers in her room for that purpose.”
She had apologised to all the parties in her judgment and told the JCIO that, in future, she would ensure cases were automatically allocated to a future hearing where there was insufficient time to hear the matter.
She said she had also raised the issue with the lead clerk to ensure that significant emails were passed promptly to judges in future.
The Lord Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor again agreed with the recommended sanction.
