Carr: Formal advice a more consistent sanction
A male circuit judge who was “overfamiliar” with a junior female member of staff has been handed formal advice for misconduct by the Lady Chief Justice.
Baroness Carr, in consultation with Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood, decided to downgrade the sanction from the formal warning that the investigating judge had recommended for His Honour Judge Martin Davis.
According to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO), a member of court staff made “numerous allegations” against him, “primarily that he made overfamiliar and inappropriate comments while they worked together, which made her uncomfortable”.
HHJ Davis, who was appointed in 2022 to sit in Taunton, denied the allegations and claimed the complainant had misremembered or misrepresented his words.
“He explained that he takes an interest in his colleagues, with whom he enjoys conversations and has built positive relationships. However, upon reflection, he had learned to be more careful when sharing personal anecdotes and views and to always have regard to the powerful position he holds.”
The investigating judge appointed by the JCIO did not uphold most of the allegations but found HHJ Davis “inappropriately and unnecessarily shared his strongly held moral beliefs with the complainant, a female member of staff who was subordinate to him, and therefore unable to object to anything said, and who did not know him”.
He was “overfamiliar in his conversations with her”, for example through his “ill-judged use of humour and excessive sharing of personal anecdotes”.
The investigating judge said this was intended to be friendly but made the complainant uncomfortable.
“He was not sufficiently mindful of his position of authority and did not consider the effect of his words and behaviour on the complainant. He therefore did not treat her with respect,” she found.
In recommending a formal warning, the investigating judge said HHJ Davis was an experienced office-holder – he was first appointed to the bench, as a deputy district judge, in 2010 – and should have been “mindful of his position of authority”.
Furthermore, while he had shown insight and reflection, he had not offered an apology.
But the JCIO recorded that the Lady Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor considered a sanction of formal advice to be “more consistent” with the findings made.
“In reaching their decision, they took into consideration that HHJ Davis did not intend to cause offence or discomfort to the complainant, and that he in fact intended to be friendly and approachable.
“They agreed with the investigating judge that the misconduct was at the lower end of seriousness. They also noted that the matter related to a brief period and that HHJ Davis had an unblemished record.”
Leave a Comment