JCIO 73/24

A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said:

The Lady Chief Justice, with the Lord Chancellor’s agreement, has issued Dr Atul Gandecha JP, a magistrate on the North East London bench with a reprimand for misconduct.

Facts

Magistrates sign a declaration and undertaking on appointment to be circumspect in their conduct and maintain the dignity, standing and good reputation of the magistracy at all times. They must demonstrate honesty, integrity and possess good character.

Self-employed magistrates are entitled to claim for financial loss if they incur additional labour costs whilst carrying out their judicial duties. When submitting a claim, a magistrate must declare that all expenses have been claimed legitimately.

A matter was referred to the London Conduct Advisory Committee (LCAC) after concerns were raised that Dr Gandecha, a dentist in private practice, had made claims for financial loss totalling £1472 between June 2020 and July 2021, which were not directly attributable to undertaking his judicial duties. This was despite being given direct advice by the HMCTS Finance Directorate regarding what he could claim for. In addition, 12 occasions were identified when Dr Gandecha claimed financial loss for locum cover, when he did not incur the cost of a locum.

Dr Gandecha’s representations

Dr Gandecha initially denied that he had done anything wrong. However he later accepted that he had been mistaken in making claims for staff at the practice covering non-dental work. He stated that he had understood from magistrate colleagues and a conversation with a manager in the HMCTS finance directorate that he could make claims to cover the expenses of running his practice on those dates. He opted to make the claims as opposed to cancelling magistrate sittings as it was an extremely busy time at the court given the Covid situation at the time.

Disciplinary Panel’s findings

A conduct panel of the LCAC recommended that Dr Gandecha be removed from office. He exercised his entitlement to have the matter reconsidered by a disciplinary panel. The disciplinary panel found that Dr Gandecha had not acted dishonestly. It found that in submitting claims for financial loss, to which he was not entitled, he was careless and breached the standards of conduct expected of a judicial office holder. The panel recognised that Dr Gandecha’s availability to sit in excess of his usual number of sittings was of great assistance to the continued running of the courts.

In recommending that Dr Gandecha be issued with a reprimand, the panel found that Dr Gandecha was not attending his surgery to work as a dentist during this period and should not have made the claims for financial loss. He did not carry out adequate checks to ascertain whether his claims complied with the policy or were legitimate.

Decision

The Lady Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor agreed with the findings of the disciplinary panel that Dr Gandecha’s actions had breached the high standards expected of a judicial office holder. They took into consideration the facts that Dr Gandecha was not able to assess the impact of his behaviour on the reputation of the magistracy other than to the extent to which it impacted upon his own reputation and continues to seek to blame others.

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