Judicial panel concludes New Brunswick judge engaged in ‘questionable’ conduct

FREDERICTON — A national judicial review body has ruled a New Brunswick judge used his authority inappropriately during an interaction with a junior lawyer — but also found there was no reasonable basis to remove the justice.

The Canadian Judicial Council review panel says Court of King’s Bench Justice Frederick Ferguson discussed privileged information with the lawyer and made comments intended to influence an upcoming recusal motion.

The review body ordered Ferguson, who serves in Miramichi, N.B., to send a written apology to the junior lawyer within 60 days and provide the panel with a copy.

It also issued a public expression of concern, saying the judge engaged in “questionable” conduct.

The 13-page ruling was released on Tuesday. It comes in response to a May 2025 complaint, alleging several acts of misconduct by Ferguson.

Lawyer Nathan Gorham confirmed to The Canadian Press he was the complainant on Wednesday. He operates in both Ontario and New Brunswick and his firm Gorham Vandebeek LLP has offices in Toronto and Fredericton.

The review panel in its report published Tuesday dismissed all but the complaint related to Ferguson speaking with the junior lawyer.

The report said Ferguson initiated an unauthorized private conversation with the unnamed junior defence lawyer at the courthouse. The lawyer was there to get an audio recording that was to be used in the pending recusal motion against Ferguson.

During the exchange, the judge discussed a previous dismissed complaint against him and suggested there might not be enough time for the lawyer to incorporate the new recording into the motion materials due that same day.

The young lawyer, who had recently been called to the bar, reported feeling intimidated by the interaction, according to the judicial panel.

The panel said Ferguson admitted the interaction was “plainly wrong” and an inappropriate use of his authority.

The judge said he was not intending to interfere with the upcoming recusal motion, but he should not have put himself in a position where he could be perceived as doing so.

It was the only complaint the panel found was substantiated. As well, it recognized Ferguson understood the actions were inappropriate and that he is “highly unlikely to engage in such behaviour in the future.”

Gorham said in the complaint that Ferguson’s behaviour was abusive, uncivil, and derogatory toward various people, including lawyers, litigants and judges. He alleged the judge made false factual clams and displayed bias in a criminal proceeding in which the complainant was counsel.

The criminal defence lawyer also alleged Ferguson acted in a way that undermined the appearance of impartiality by giving advice to another judge handling an active court case involving them.

Ferguson made comments in court “which denigrated the value of a witness’s evidence based on stereotypes regarding sexual activity and gender,” Gorham alleged.

And Gorham accused Ferguson of making inappropriate comments in court concerning other judges.

But those remaining complaints were dismissed because they were either found to be unsubstantiated, related to the judge’s use of discretion or did not rise to the necessary threshold to be considered judicial misconduct.

The Canadian Judicial Council said it struck the review panel to consider the complaint on March 26 of this year. It collected submissions from Ferguson and his boss, Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench of New Brunswick Tracey DeWare.

The panel included Nova Scotia’s chief justice Michael Wood, justice William H. Goodridge of Newfoundland and Labrador and civilian Mary Kloosterman.

Gorham, in an emailed statement on Wednesday, said he would not comment “on the substance of the decision as there is a related application ongoing before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.”

That filing, Gorham said, aims to bring more transparency to the Canadian Judicial Council’s approach to reviewing allegations of judge misconduct.

“The current CJC process violates fundamental democratic principles because it permits the dismissal of serious and credible complaints based on the private written defence of the subject judge, without an investigation and without permitting the complainant to respond,” he wrote.

In July 2020, Ferguson was removed as judge in the case of Matthew Raymond, who was accused of shooting four people in Fredericton in 2018.

Defence counsel Gorham had applied for Ferguson to recuse himself from the high-profile case due to the judge’s alleged bias against Raymond.

DeWare, the chief justice, said at the time the application was moot as Ferguson had been replaced, though no reason was given for the judge’s removal.

Attempts to contact Ferguson were not successful on Wednesday.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 12, 2026.

Eli Ridder, The Canadian Press