Under-fire judge could be fired in US

Supreme Court judge Bill Wilson would be disciplined or could be sacked for failing to reveal he owed a lawyer hundreds of thousands of dollars if he was in the United States, an international judicial ethics expert says.

A US judge must disclose if they owed substantial amounts of money to a lawyer involved in a case the judge heard, New York University law school professor Stephen Gillers said.

Justice Wilson, who remains sitting in New Zealand's highest court, is under investigation for failing on at least four occasions to disclose that he owed nearly $250,000 to Queen's Counsel Alan Galbraith when he heard an appeal involving Mr Galbraith.

Allegations have since emerged from former Supreme Court judge Sir Edmund Thomas, in a complaint to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, Sir David Gascoigne, that Mr Galbraith was pressing Justice Wilson to pay up.

Professor Gillers, who has read Sir Edmund's complaint, said that in the US "a judge who is indebted to the lawyer for a party in a substantial amount – and hundreds of thousands of dollars would be substantial – has an obligation to inform the opposing party".

"The duty to disclose the size and terms of the debt is clear – this is the rule under the Code of Judicial Conduct of the American Bar Association."

Professor Gillers said the public and opposing parties in a case "should not have to guess" whether a judge was unduly influenced by a substantial debt, whether consciously or not.

A judge who did not reveal a substantial debt would be disciplined.

"If the failure were intentional", sanctions would range from censure to removal from office, he said.

Sir Edmund's complaint to Sir David alleged Justice Wilson made up a "fictitious" story to avoid disclosing the debt to Mr Galbraith.

The Supreme Court held two hearings on the matter of Justice Wilson's business relationship with Mr Galbraith. At the first, the court dismissed a claim by a group of woolgrowers of apparent bias by Justice Wilson because of the business relationship.

A later hearing was held when the woolgrowers learned Justice Wilson had not fully disclosed the extent of the relationship to the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court ruled he should not have sat on the case involving Mr Galbraith and an appeal on the case is to be heard next month.

Sir David is investigating the wool growers' complaint against Justice Wilson. Sir David can either dismiss the complaint or recommend that Attorney-General Chris Finlayson appoint a judicial conduct panel to investigate further.

- © Fairfax NZ News