JCIO 38/24

A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said:

Mr Justice Keehan, with the Lord Chancellor’s agreement, has issued Mr Timothy Nathan with formal advice for misconduct.

Facts

The expedited process in the Judicial Conduct Magistrates Rules 2023 enables the JCIO to advise the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice that a magistrate should be issued with formal advice or a formal warning where—

(a) there is no dispute as to the facts set out in the complaint;
(b) the alleged facts relate to conduct which the JCIO considers that the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice would be very likely to decide amounted to misconduct; and
(c) the JCIO considers that the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice would be very likely to decide that formal advice or a formal warning was the appropriate disciplinary sanction.

The declaration and undertaking signed by all magistrates on their appointment states that they will agree to be circumspect in their conduct and maintain the good reputation of the magistracy at all times, in their private, working, and public lives. Additionally, guidance for magistrates advises that all personal email and phone devices should be switched off in court.

Following a hearing in March 2024, two magistrates who had sat with Mr Nathan on the bench, complained to the London Conduct Advisory Committee that Mr Nathan had been using his iPhone and iPad during the proceedings to read and respond to personal messages and emails. One of the magistrates reported that they had seen Mr Nathan using his iPad on a separate occasion to send personal messages to his partner, a fellow magistrate, who was sitting at the back of the court, having finished sitting for the day.

Timothy Nathan JP’s representations

Mr Nathan accepted that he had used his personal devices to send and receive messages, in relation to his self-employment as a professional pilot, during the long pauses in the hearing. He denied that there was any effect on his performance at the hearing or on the dignity of the court. The only people affected were the two magistrates who were sitting with him, as no other court users were aware of what he was doing. Whilst he did not recall, the other incident mentioned in the complaint, he confirmed that it was possible that he was having a text conversation on that occasion with his partner regarding travelling home arrangements.

Decision

Mr Justice Keehan, on behalf of the Lady Chief Justice, and the Lord Chancellor agreed with advice from the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office that Mr Nathan’s actions risked reputational damage to the magistracy, if it had become known to other court users what he had been doing. They also took into consideration that Mr Nathan’s actions had distracted his colleagues on the bench, who were sufficiently concerned to raise the matter with him at the post court review and lodge a complaint with the advisory committee. In agreeing to issue Mr Nathan with formal advice, they took into consideration that he took full responsibility for his actions, has a long and previously unblemished conduct record and has agreed to abide by the outcome of any findings.

Notes for Editors

Media queries in relation to the JCIO should be made in the first instance to the Judicial Press Office - telephone 020 7073 4852 or via email - press.enquiries@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk

Sanctions for misconduct by judicial office-holders are set out in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. They are, in order of severity: formal advice, formal warning, reprimand and removal from office.

For more information about the Office, including details on how to make a complaint against a judicial office holder, you can visit the JCIO website at: Judicial Conduct Investigations website