The Chief Justice of Gibraltar should be removed from office because his behaviour has brought his office into dispute, senior UK judges have recommended.

In an unprecedented ruling the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council said that Derek Schofield should be removed “by reason of his inability to discharge the functions of his office”.

Their recommendation in a ruling on Thursday now goes to the Queen after a keenly-watched appeal by Mr Justice Schofield.

His behaviour led to allegations of misconduct in a scandal that has rocked the tiny colony and split both public opinion and the legal profession.

Seven Supreme Court justices sat at the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to hear the appeal from the Chief Justice.

The majority ruled that although there were several incidents that amounted to misbehaviour, none was “of itself sufficiently serious to justify his dismissal on the ground of misconduct.

“There were, however, incidents in a course of conduct that resulted in an inability on the part of the Chief Justice to discharge the functions of his office. Accordingly, the Chief Justice should be removed.”

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, giving the majority decision, said that the case had “aspects of a Greek tragedy”.

The “terminal” position began when Anne, the Chief Justice’s Kenyan-born wife, a barrister, went public with her view that the Gibraltar Government wanted to hound him from office and ended when he brought judicial review proceedings.

The actions of the Chief Justice and his wife had rendered his position untenable, Lord Phillips said.

The ruling comes after the Governor of Gibraltar suspended the Chief Justice and appointed an independent tribunal to look into allegations about his behaviour.

The tribunal, under Lord Cullen of Whitekirk, investigated 23 episodes between 1999 and 2007 involving complaints about the Chief Justice’s conduct.

Its damning report in November 2008 found that his conduct “repeatedly fell far short of what befitted the dignity of his office”.

The inquiry found that Mr Justice Schofield “showed a preoccupation, bordering on an obsession, with judicial independence”, claiming it to be under threat when that was not the case.

That led to his responding in an “improper or excessive manner” to executive action of which he disapproved.

The inquiry went on to say he had showed himself unable to “restrain himself from supporting his wife in her attack on the members of the Bar Council or her libel action against its chairman.”

At a ceremony in 2006 the Chief Justice lost his temper in an incident of “thoroughly unattractive behaviour” because the colony’s Chief Minister was given precedence over him at the farewell to the outgoing governor.

He took this out on the deputy governor and the inquiry was justified in describing this as “disgraceful behaviour”, Lord Phillips said.

Other episodes included an attack on the new draft Constitution for Gibraltar where he showed a “serious lack of judgment” and did not exercise foresight or think of the political consequences of his actions.

On the Judicial Service Bill, which stripped the Chief Justice of his role as head of the judiciary, the tribunal found that the Chief Justice had shown a draft Bill to his wife in their house, expecting her to go public.

Lord Phillips said: “This was a discreditable episode.”

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, with Lord Judge (the Lord Chief Justice) and Lord Clarke of Stone-Cum-Ebony, dismissed the Chief Justice’s appeal.

The minority dissenters were Lords Hope of Craighead, Rodger of Earlsferry and Baroness Hale of Richmond.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Queen uses Christmas speech to praise Forces
• Helmand Christmas — the briefest of respites
• Hard work — but the finest bacon