Log In

Reset Password

Exonerated judge sues Governor and others for damages

Puisne Judge Nicole Stoneham (File photograph)

A judge who was exonerated by a tribunal after being suspended for alleged judicial misconduct is suing the Governor, the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General.

Puisne Judge Nicole Stoneham filed civil proceedings against the three post-holders on May 29, according to the causes book at the Supreme Court.

The Royal Gazette understands that she is seeking damages, as well as declarations from the court that her rights were violated.

Mrs Justice Stoneham was ordered to stop working on July 11 last year by former governor Rena Lalgie after a complaint made by Narinder Hargun, who was Chief Justice at the time, to the Judicial and Legal Services Committee.

The complaint related to a highly critical May 2023 Court of Appeal ruling which ordered the judge to recuse herself immediately from a continuing legal case between an unnamed couple at loggerheads over schooling arrangements for their teenage son.

That ruling found that Mrs Justice Stoneham failed to disclose that she had intervened in December 2018 to secure the release of the father from police custody after he was arrested for an alleged breach of a domestic violence protection order.

She was also faulted for failing to explain her connection to his family when ruling on the question of her own recusal.

Mr Hargun sought the JLSC’s view on whether the conduct of Mrs Justice Stoneham amounted to judicial misconduct and the committee concluded in September 2023 that there was a case to answer.

That led Ms Lalgie to suspend the judge and establish a tribunal — chaired by Lord Burnett of Maldon, the former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales — which examined court documents and heard witness evidence during its months-long investigation.

Lord Burnett of Maldon (Photograph supplied)

The tribunal submitted its report to new governor Andrew Murdoch in April this year, concluding that there was no misconduct by Mrs Justice Stoneham.

The tribunal found two errors of law by the judge, neither of them amounting to judicial misconduct.

It stated in its report that “all judges make mistakes from time to time. Such mistakes are appropriately corrected through the appellate process”.

Government House said in a press release at the time: “As a result of their investigation, the tribunal advised the Governor that there could be no question that Justice Stoneham has been guilty of misbehaviour for the purposes of section 74(4) of the Constitution.

“In addition, the tribunal’s findings led to the immediate termination of the suspension of Justice Stoneham.”

Mrs Justice Stoneham, the head of the Bermuda judiciary’s matrimonial jurisdiction, was told she could return to her judicial responsibilities, but the Gazette understands she is off work sick.

Her lawsuit, filed on her behalf by Resolution Chambers, is understood to cite a breach of her rights under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

It alleges that the JLSC, which was initially asked to form a view on the complaint, did not have the power to make a determination on whether there was a case to answer.

The judge is also understood to allege that the adverse comments in the May 2023 Court of Appeal ruling were extraneous to the issues at hand and the Chief Justice should not have acted on them.

Mrs Justice Stoneham is seeking declarations from the court that her constitutional and convention rights were violated, that the JLSC is an unconstitutional body and that she is entitled to damages and costs.

The suspension and investigation of Mrs Justice Stoneham may be unprecedented in Bermuda. It is also extremely rare globally for a judge to face charges of judicial misconduct.

Mr Murdoch and Larry Mussenden, Mr Hargun’s successor as Chief Justice, declined to comment. Kim Wilkerson, the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, was asked for comment.

To read Government House’s May 15, 2025 press release on the tribunal report, see Related Media

It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers