A Liverpool judge who was branded “rude”, “unprincipled” and “unfair” has been reprimanded for “serious misconduct” following an investigation into his conduct.
Judge Robert Stephen Dodds, who sits at the family court in Liverpool, was investigated by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) after he was rebuked twice by Court of Appeal judges and told that he should be embarrassed by his conduct.
The JCIO opened an investigation in February after complaints from several Merseyside families who have had their children taken into care following orders made by Judge Dodds.
Liverpool law firm Quality Solicitors Jackson Canter, who were involved in one of the cases criticised by the Court of Appeal, also made a formal complaint.
The JCIO today confirmed that Judge Dodds had been reprimanded over his conduct and management of three court cases, which they said amounted to serious misconduct.
A spokesman said there was no evidence of misconduct on HHJ Dodds’ part in relation to a fourth case.
Judge Dodds was rebuked for using “unrestrained and immoderate language” after he told a 13-year-old girl that her case for a DNA test on her father, to which both parents had agreed, was “codswallop”.
The judge dismissed the application, telling the court: “The lunatics had truly taken over the asylum, and that just because the lunatics had said that they wanted something did not mean that they should be spoon-fed.”
He said he “resented” having to spend some of his Saturday reading “codswallop” and suggested that the girl pay for the DNA test herself, rather than through legal aid.
Senior judges said his remarks constituted a “serious procedural irregularity” and said the judge’s language was to be “deplored”.
They said: “Appointment as a judge was not a licence to be gratuitously rude to those appearing before him.”
Judge Dodds was also criticised by appeal court superiors over another hearing which saw an 11-year-old boy separated from his mum.
Appeal judges branded Judge Robert Dodds “unprincipled and “unfair” after he made an on-the-spot decision to force apart a family at a hearing that was only supposed to plot the future path of the case.
They said he dismissed the boy’s hopes of living with his mum “within a matter of minutes” on the basis of an out-of-date report by social workers.
He dismissed the report by the boy’s guardian as “Victorian detail” – and “made abundantly clear…his determination to conclude the case there and then,” the appeal judges said.
His conduct was condemned by the country’s most senior family judge, Sir James Munby.
In am appeal ruling, he said: “No dispassionate observer of the proceedings could think that justice was done, let alone that it was seen to be done. It was not.”
He added: “A parent facing the removal of their child must be entitled to put their case to the court, however seemingly forlorn.
“It is one of the oldest principles of our law – it goes back over 400 years, to the earliest years of the seventeenth century – that no-one is to be condemned unheard.”
The sign outside The Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, central London. Photo: Nick Ansell/PA Wire
Lord Justice Lewison added that justice could not be done “when a judge has apparently made up his mind before hearing argument or evidence.”
He said: “A closed mind is incompatible with the administration of justice.”
Several Merseyside families who have had their children taken into care contacted the ECHO after Court of Appeal concerns over the judge’s conduct were reported.
A spokesperson for the JCIO said: “His Honour Judge Robert Stephen Dodds, a family court circuit judge, was criticised by the Court of Appeal in relation to his conduct and case
management of four court cases – Re A, Re P, Re S and Re S-W.
“The Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice have considered the matter in accordance with the Judicial Discipline (Prescribed Procedures) Regulations 2014, and have issued HHJ Dodds a reprimand after finding
that his actions in relation to Re A, Re S-W and Re P amounted to serious misconduct.
“There was no evidence of misconduct on HHJ Dodds’ part in relation to the case of Re S.”
Source: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/