Ontario judges resign amid investigations for ‘toxic’ conduct, ‘harassment and bullying’, Under provincial law, records of complaints against Ontario judges are anonymous unless the judge has been ordered to face a public discipline hearing — a rare occurrence by Jacques Gallant Courts and Justice Reporter, Aug 14, 2025, Toronto Star
Two provincial court judges stepped down last year before investigations could be completed into allegations of inappropriate and unprofessional behaviour — including one who allegedly created a “very uncomfortable working environment” for court staff, according to an annual report of the Ontario Judicial Council.
A third judge was sent to therapy and made to apologize after the council received seven complaints from court employees who alleged the judge’s “toxic” workplace conduct “constituted harassment and bullying.” That judge also ended up leaving the court, but only after the investigation had been completed.
The judicial council is responsible for investigating and disciplining judges of the Ontario Court of Justice, who are appointed by the provincial government. Its 2024 report, released in June, contains a summary of each complaint dealt with behind closed doors last year by committees made up of judges, lawyers, and members of the public.
Just like most years, the bulk of the complaints were dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction, the judges in question retiring, or the complaint being found frivolous. In accordance with provincial law, any identifying information is withheld from the complaint summary unless the judge has been ordered to face a public discipline hearing — a rare occurrence — and something that critics have long said needs to change.
‘Pistol-whipping a white woman’: Ontario judge who made ‘racist, xenophobic’ comments is reprimanded in secret
According to the 2024 report, a manager at an undisclosed courthouse complained that a judge had engaged in “inappropriate conduct” toward two female employees. It was alleged that the judge said to one employee in the courtroom, “How could I forget that beautiful smile and those eyes,” gave her his business card with his personal cell number, and asked her to text him. The employee felt she had no choice but to comply.
The complaint further alleged that the judge asked the woman to go out for wine with him, suggested she visit him at his home, texted her asking what her name meant, and said: “If you had your druthers, would you want your name to mean, ‘strong, vivacious woman?’”
The manager said in their complaint that the judge’s conduct led to “a very uncomfortable working environment” for the employee, and that it was inappropriate and disrespectful.
The manager also complained that the judge reportedly told a court reporter while they were alone in the courtroom that they should share a bottle of wine and that, as they discussed her career goals, he said, “You are still young, beautiful, and intelligent.”
Fucking asshole judge! Canada has far too many misogynistic politicians appoint far too many misogynistic judges. If this is their behaviour in person, how do these fucking judges prejudice against women, notably marginalized not pretty not sexy, in their rulings?
The judge also allegedly invited the court reporter into his chambers on a number of occasions for coffee, and once asked that she practice Italian with him. The manager said in their complaint that “the court reporter was extremely uncomfortable with the judge’s conduct,” according to the report summary.
But before the council could finish its investigation, it “received confirmation that the subject judge was no longer a judge of the Ontario Court of Justice,” meaning the council had lost jurisdiction to look into the allegations.What? Moved to the court of appeal? Arbitration/mediation?
Another judge also left the court before the council could finish investigating a lawyer’s complaint that the judge had been “unprofessional, discourteous and aggressive” during several child protection proceedings.
The annual report provides no details regarding the allegations against a third judge who was referred to therapy and made to write letters of apology after multiple court employees complained about the judge’s toxic behaviour. After meeting with the judge, Chief Justice Sharon Nicklas reported to the council that the treatment sessions had been “very impactful” for them.Pfffft, I don’t believe it for a second. Shit humans easily and efficiently pretend to improve; I bet shit judges are experts at pretending (and lying) and getting away with it to keep the abuses going strong.
“The Chief Justice observed that the judge acknowledged that the workplace conduct had a dramatic impact on the lives and mental health of the complainants,” says the annual report. “The judge acknowledged that the workplace conduct was unacceptable.”
The council was then informed that the judge was no longer with the court.Also moved up to another court, or to another court in a different province.or mediation/arbitration?
Finally, another judge received a talking-to from Nicklas as a result of a complaint that they had “abused the prestige of judicial office for private purposes” by getting involved in a dispute “over an application to reconfigure a local roadway” in their municipality.
The complainant said the judge had organized neighbours to attend a municipal council meeting to oppose the application, and had spoken to councillors about it, including by referring to their job as a judge.
A complaints subcommittee expressed concerns with the allegations; during the investigation, the judge “disavowed” having organized residents, but acknowledged that they sent an email to a councillor referring to their position as a judge and former prosecutor, while denying “having done so for any improper purpose.” The judge said they were entitled as a local resident to be involved in the dispute.
But they also recognized “the potential for impropriety” in referring to their career and title “during public engagement on contentious issues,” and using their judicial email address for matters not related to court.
“The judge confirmed they would avoid any such references in the future,” says the annual report.
The council referred the judge to a meeting with the chief justice, who reported that “it was very evident that the judge had carefully reflected upon the conduct in question and the relevant ethical principles,” according to the annual report, and that the judge had expressed “sincere regret.”
The file was then closed.
Refer also to: