A Superior Court justice in Milton has been ordered to participate in coaching from a more senior judge after the Canadian Judicial Council found that his tone was “abusive and intimidating” during a family court hearing last September.
In a recent decision, the council wrote that Justice Charles Chang’s tone was “inappropriate” and “intimidating at times.”
“His interventions go beyond what is usually considered the exercise of proper firmness,” the report read.
The council’s report, which includes information from both a screening officer and a reviewing member, does not go into detail about exactly what was said during the hearing.
According to the report, Chang was dealing with an “urgent motion for temporary orders” with respect to “decision-making responsibility, parenting time and the children’s attendance at school and daycare.”
The report notes that Chang “repeatedly expressed his dissatisfaction” with the “he said/she said” nature of the submissions, adding that there was “little or no neutral, external evidence to support the parties’ assertions.”
On the day in question, the report states, Chang had been informed that the Milton Courthouse, where the matter was being heard, would be “closed indefinitely due to substance contamination in the building.”
Asbestos, mould and structural concerns were to blame for repeated closures of the Milton courthouse over the past year.
In a letter to the reviewer, Chang’s counsel wrote that the judge was “very distressed” about the closure, as it was not the first time in the recent past where the courthouse had been closed.
The reviewing member in the case found that while the closures caused “a lot of rearrangement, reassignments, and uncertainty,” that alone “cannot be given emphasis” to justify the interventions and tone in court.
In response to some of the concerns that were flagged, the report read, Justice Chang’s counsel noted that it was the judge’s “colloquial and direct way of expressing the concerns he had as the judge dealing with an application that he considered to have been poorly prepared and ill-considered.”
In his letter, Chang apologized to the complainant if “she left the hearing feeling that she had been verbally abused and intimidated,” the council’s report read. He also recognized in his letter that his words and tone were “not appropriate” at times, according to the report.
“While that was never Justice Chang’s intent, he indicated that he has reflected on this issue and sought out the assistance of a retired judicial colleague as a mentor on this area,” the report continued.
Chang was first appointed to the Superior Court of Justice in 2022. CP24 has reached out to Chang for comment but has not yet received a response.
While the council found that removal from office was “not justified,” the three-member review panel noted that it will “take an action of a private nature” while also ordering Chang take part in “more coaching with a senior judge for a duration and frequency” decided by Ontario’s Chief Justice.
“As stated by the reviewing member, this matter is not trivial,” the panel wrote.
“Justice Chang is at the beginning of his judicial career and the Council cannot simply hope that this will not happen again if Justice Chang faces yet another urgent matter with similar challenges.”