Judge warned over misconduct in own divorce proceedings


Divorce: Judge signed documents in then wife’s name

A deputy district judge has received a formal warning for misconduct over how he presented his financial situation in divorce proceedings.

Dinshaw Printer, a solicitor who practises as a family lawyer, was investigated after the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) received two complaints about his conduct.

According to the JCIO, these alleged that he had managed his matrimonial finances in a way that called his integrity into a question, and that he had failed to disclose a material change to his financial position during court proceedings.

The Guide to Judicial Conduct reminds judges to manage their financial affairs in a prudent manner, and that they should ensure their conduct maintains public confidence in the judiciary.

DDJ Printer denied the majority of the allegations but accepted that he had signed documents in his then wife’s name and that he had failed to update the court.

The investigating judge appointed by the JCIO dismissed most of the allegations but found that, although there was no evidence that DDJ Printer had attempted to defraud anyone by signing financial documents on behalf of his then wife, the action still amounted to misconduct.

“Furthermore, they found that DDJ Printer had deliberately failed to disclose a material alteration to his financial position during court proceedings.

“While accepting that DDJ Printer did update the court before the final deadline, that this was not an attempt to hide assets, and the delay in disclosure would not affect the final decision, the investigating judge considered that this action amounted to misconduct.”

The JCIO said that the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, and Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood agreed with the investigating judge’s recommendation that DDJ Printer be reprimanded.




    Readers Comments

  • Michael Miller says:

    So let me get this right. This Judge fraudulently signed documents that were not his to sign, and then faces virtually zero consequences at the hands of his fellow judges. Wonderful; my faith in the judiciary is solid (as quick sand).

  • Richard Foreman says:

    Yes, that is my take on the matter too. No consequences, just a bit of a telling off by way of a rebuke.
    Whether, as I suspect, things have generally always been so I don’t know, as we are still only letting a few rays of daylight in, rather than the full sunshine!

  • Anon says:

    Don’t worry, the SRA will have him publicly flogged

  • Z Strachan says:

    One rule for them but not for us…No consequences for his actions.

  • Charanjit Singh Tathgar says:

    One Law for the peasants and another for the Law makers. Are we on the same planet? I wonder.

  • Sue Ingram says:

    Unbelievable. Someone who is supposed to uphold the law is allowed to effectively get away with fraudulently signing documents. He should at the very least stop being a DDJ.

  • Anthony brown says:

    They are all the same!

    One rule for them one rule for us!

    The uk is a farce and full of people with ego problems especially the judiciary


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


Five key issues to consider when adopting an AI-based legal tech

As generative AI starts to play a bigger role in our working lives, there are some key issues that your law firm needs to consider when adopting an AI-based legal tech.


Bulk litigation – not always working in consumers interests

For consumers to get the benefit, bulk litigation needs to be done well, and we are increasingly concerned that there are significant problems in some areas of this market.


ABSs, cost and audits – fixing regulation after Axiom Ince

A feature of law firm collapses and frauds has sometimes been the over-concentration of power in outdated and overburdened systems of control.


Loading animation