In written reasons released this month, a hearing panel of the Ontario Judicial Council rejected Ontario Court Justice Howard Chisvin’s request to have the public pay his legal costs stemming from his disciplinary matter last year.
Chisvin, of course, is the Newmarket, Ont., judge who dismissed 33 criminal charges in 2011 after a Crown prosecutor was late returning from a break. According to accounts of the proceedings on July 21, 2011, Chisvin gave the Crown one minute to come back to court. He admitted misconduct at a hearing in November 2012 and received a reprimand and a warning.
More recently, he sought more than $43,000 in compensation for his legal costs in defending the misconduct case. Given Chisvin’s remorse, his willingness to own up to his actions, and his explanations for what he did, there was a viable argument for giving him some assistance with the significant legal costs he faces. After all, the disciplinary matter related to the performance of his duties and it was clear from comments at the hearing and letters of support filed on his behalf that the legal community regards him highly.
Nevertheless, the panel was right to reject the costs application. “As we noted in our reasons for disposition, Justice Chisvin is to be commended for facing up to the fact that his conduct fell below the required standard,” the panel wrote. “However, it remains that he did fall below that standard and we did make a finding of misconduct.
“Taking into account all the circumstances of this matter, it is our view that the public purse should not be required to bear the cost of his legal representation.”
While Chisvin faces significant costs, the public did as well given the need to go through the legal process once again to dispose of the criminal charges he dismissed. It may be more appropriate, then, for a judges’ association to look into ways of assisting people like Chisvin who find themselves in trouble due to what the panel heard was an “aberration” rather than having the public pay.
The issue comes as a similar case arose involving the actions of a justice of the peace. According to the Toronto Star, justice of the peace Alfred Johnston dismissed more than 60 charges — mostly involving the Highway Traffic Act — in December after a prosecutor was a couple of minutes late. It’s unclear what may happen with that matter, but it’s obvious that given that the disposition in Chisvin’s case has failed to completely deter similar conduct, it would be inappropriate to be forgiving on the costs issue for the time being.
— Glenn Kauth
Chisvin, of course, is the Newmarket, Ont., judge who dismissed 33 criminal charges in 2011 after a Crown prosecutor was late returning from a break. According to accounts of the proceedings on July 21, 2011, Chisvin gave the Crown one minute to come back to court. He admitted misconduct at a hearing in November 2012 and received a reprimand and a warning.
More recently, he sought more than $43,000 in compensation for his legal costs in defending the misconduct case. Given Chisvin’s remorse, his willingness to own up to his actions, and his explanations for what he did, there was a viable argument for giving him some assistance with the significant legal costs he faces. After all, the disciplinary matter related to the performance of his duties and it was clear from comments at the hearing and letters of support filed on his behalf that the legal community regards him highly.
Nevertheless, the panel was right to reject the costs application. “As we noted in our reasons for disposition, Justice Chisvin is to be commended for facing up to the fact that his conduct fell below the required standard,” the panel wrote. “However, it remains that he did fall below that standard and we did make a finding of misconduct.
“Taking into account all the circumstances of this matter, it is our view that the public purse should not be required to bear the cost of his legal representation.”
While Chisvin faces significant costs, the public did as well given the need to go through the legal process once again to dispose of the criminal charges he dismissed. It may be more appropriate, then, for a judges’ association to look into ways of assisting people like Chisvin who find themselves in trouble due to what the panel heard was an “aberration” rather than having the public pay.
The issue comes as a similar case arose involving the actions of a justice of the peace. According to the Toronto Star, justice of the peace Alfred Johnston dismissed more than 60 charges — mostly involving the Highway Traffic Act — in December after a prosecutor was a couple of minutes late. It’s unclear what may happen with that matter, but it’s obvious that given that the disposition in Chisvin’s case has failed to completely deter similar conduct, it would be inappropriate to be forgiving on the costs issue for the time being.
— Glenn Kauth
For more, see "Chisvin owes an explanation" and "Chisvin awaiting fate after admitting misconduct."
