Complainant alleged that they were pressured and under duress and were coerced into accepting an inadequate settlement offer from a traffic accident.

20170001 - Complainant alleged that they were pressured and under duress and were coerced into accepting an inadequate settlement offer from a traffic accident. The complainant is of the view that Counsel had the obligation to proceed to trial and that the judge improperly allowed the motion to proceed. They complained that the matter was heard in open court, and alleged that the Justice made an inappropriate remark.

Litigants who are of the view that an agreement to settle was made under duress should appeal it with the courts. It is not for the Council to review such matters as it concerns the exercise by the judge during the hearing. It is open to a judge to facilitate settlement discussion to ensure litigants fully understand the nature of the process.

The decision to proceed with the motion, and whether their Counsel was at liberty to ask to be removed, are not issues of conduct on the part of the judge. In rare circumstances are the public excluded from the courtroom at the request of one of the parties, and only if deemed necessary by the judge. In review of the alleged inappropriate comment, this was not substantiated.