Accusations fly across judicial arena

Supreme Court Judge Bill Wilson's lawyer launched a stinging attack yesterday on retired judge Sir Edmund (Ted) Thomas, accusing him of being dishonourable, engaging in fantasy and breaching a confidence.

Colin Carruthers QC was in the High Court at Wellington and Sir Edmund was sitting 5m behind him.

Sir Edmund is an interested party in Justice Wilson's bid to halt the judicial conduct proceedings against him progressing to the Judicial Complaints Panel, which can recommend a judge's removal.

Justice Wilson was not in court.

Sir Edmund is one of three people who complained to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner, Sir David Gascoigne, about Justice Wilson.

The alleged misconduct centres on the extent of disclosures by Justice Wilson about his business relationship with Alan Galbraith QC before he appeared before the judge in a 2007 case.

The judge made an informal disclosure to the counsel opposing Mr Galbraith in March 2007 about their joint ownership of Rich Hill, a company that owned land rented to Rich Hill Stud, a separate horse-breeding company that is part-owned by Mr Galbraith but not by Mr Wilson.

The Supreme Court has found Mr Wilson should have made a formal disclosure with more detail.

Mr Carruthers yesterday said the claim Mr Wilson had been in debt to Mr Galbraith was wrong and Sir Edmund had got many facts wrong about the financial relationship.

Sir Edmund had said there was a "moral obligation" on Mr Wilson to make greater shareholder contributions to get them in balance with Mr Galbraith's even though there was no legal obligation.

Mr Carruthers also said: "there is no doubt that what Sir Edmund said is speculative and conjecture, hearsay, wrong in fact and entitled to no weight whatsoever".

It was reported in April Sir Edmund's involvement in the case had been prompted initially by a conversation he had with Jim Farmer QC a good friend of Mr Galbraith's.

Mr Carruthers said Mr Farmer had been giving Mr Galbraith legal advice and had approached Sir Edmund for advice.

"No matter how much wriggling Sir Edmund now engages in, that confidence was not conditioned or conditional... Sir Edmund's breach of confidence and privilege is dishonourable."

The judge "did not owe Mr Galbraith a cent and he never has".

Mr Carruthers said Mr Wilson was being denied natural justice.