Ap­peal of com­plaints against judge de­nied

Judge John Joy will be in­ves­ti­gated by a tri­bunal for al­leged dis­parag­ing com­ments about the jus­tice sys­tem in Labrador

The Western Star - - CLOSE TO HOME - Tele­[email protected]­gram.com

An ap­peal of com­plaints against pro­vin­cial court Judge John Joy has been dis­missed, as a three-and-a-half-year wait for a hear­ing on the com­plaints con­tin­ues.

It is al­leged that Joy au­thored a memo on March 20, 2014, wherein “in­ap­pro­pri­ate com­ments re­spect­ing the ad­min­is­tra­tion of jus­tice in Labrador” were made and sent to a Crown at­tor­ney. Sim­i­lar com­ments were also al­legedly made in open court by Joy on or around Feb. 28, 2014.

It’s al­leged the com­ments vi­o­lated the ju­di­cial code of ethics.

A tri­bunal was ap­pointed the hear the com­plaints against Joy shortly af­ter the com­plaints were made.

In ad­vance of the hear­ings on the com­plaints, which are ex­pected in Jan­uary 2019, Joy filed four pro­ce­dural ap­pli­ca­tions, the fourth of which ques­tioned whether the code of ethics were legally valid or ap­pli­ca­ble to Joy in the spe­cific case be­fore the tri­bunal.

The tri­bunal de­cided the code of con­duct was not ap­pli­ca­ble, but the rules found in Eth­i­cal Prin­ci­ples for Judges used by the Cana­dian Ju­di­cial Coun­cil did ap­ply.

Jus­tice James Adams was asked to re­view the de­ci­sion of the tri­bunal.

Adams ruled that since the hear­ings for the ini­tial com­plaints have not yet oc­curred and Joy would still be able to ap­peal the de­ci­sion of the tri­bunal on the com­plaints, there would be “no real risk of prej­u­dice to Judge Joy that might lead to an in­jus­tice.”

With that, Joy will wait for Jan­uary to de­ter­mine whether any rep­ri­mand is rec­om­mended for his al­leged com­ments.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.