Share:

High Court grants permission for judicial review to proceed against the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office amidst sanctioning of Employment Judge

On 15 January 2026, the High Court granted permission on all grounds for three Claimants, Susannah Hickman‑Gray, Alison McDermott and Dr Hinaa Toheed, to proceed to a final hearing in their judicial review challenge against the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (“JCIO”).

The case concerns allegations of bullying and inappropriate conduct against Employment Judge Lancaster. This will be the first time in the JCIO’s history that its interpretation of “judicial misconduct” will be scrutinised by the High Court, and the first time that the meaning of the Judicial Conduct Rules 2023 (“the 2023 Rules”) will be examined. 

The Claimants form part of a wider group of 10 complainants, each claiming to have suffered bullying, intimidation, banging of the table and/or excessive interruption from Judge Lancaster during the course of their Employment Tribunal hearings over the last 7 years. The number of those impacted has grown so large that the BBC has reported on his conduct and the complaints about him on several occasions.

The JCIO refused to investigate all but one of their complaints, primarily on the basis that their complaints could not amount to misconduct as they took place within the context of “case management”. Others were rejected on the basis that an approximate time stamp for the alleged misconduct had not been provided, despite the fact that all complainants were denied transcripts of their hearings, and several were unrepresented. The JCIO dismissed the one complaint it did investigate on the basis that there was insufficient evidence of misconduct, while one complaint, raised by Dr Toheed, was held in abeyance pending her appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. 

The women bring a claim for judicial review against the JCIO’s decision. They argue inter alia that: 

  1. The JCIO incorrectly excludes all issues of “case management” from its definition of misconduct. As is common sense, the 2023 Rules make clear that misconduct can take place within judicial case management. As Harriet Harman recently put it in her “Independent review of bullying and harassment at the Bar”, “Bullying can still take place in the context of case management decisions”.
  2. The requirement to identify the timing of the alleged misconduct is procedurally unfair in circumstances where complainants are routinely refused access to audio records or transcripts of their hearings, and may be unrepresented.
  3. The JCIO has failed to take relevant considerations into account, including by examining incidents in isolation rather than considering their cumulative effect.
  4. The JCIO’s approach to re-considering complaints that have been previously considered by other bodies is unlawful, where such complaints are put in a new light by subsequent, similar complaints brought by others.
  5. The JCIO made material errors of fact, including by holding that Dr Toheed’s complaint had been “dealt with”, when in fact it had only been held in abeyance.
  6. The JCIO should have started an investigation on its own initiative once it received these group complaints. 

In granting permission in full for the Claimants to proceed to a substantive hearing (most likely later this year), Mr Justice Johnson observed:

“It is arguable that although there is a conceptual difference between misconduct and judicial case management, they are not mutually exclusive, such that complaints of misconduct may be investigated under the 2023 Rules even if the alleged conduct took place in the context of judicial case management.”

The Court has directed that Judge Lancaster be joined as an Interested Party, enabling him to participate in the proceedings, and has granted the Claimants a costs‑capping order, recognising that the claim raises issues of wider public importance. The Claimants are Crowdfunding for the case here.

Finnian Clarke is instructed to represent the Claimants by Emily Soothill, Catherine Dowle and Öykü Aktaş of Deighton Pierce Glynn. He is being led by Charlotte Kilroy KC of Blackstone Chambers. 

You can read more about this case in The Times here and here, and the BBC.