Tribunal member reprimanded after calling Conservatives a ‘tumour’

A member of an employment tribunal who described a group of Conservatives as a “tumour” has been given a formal rebuke by the judicial authorities.
It emerged in March that Jed ­Purkis, who had been a non-legal member of a tribunal hearing into claims that a teacher was sacked for challenging her school’s transgender policy, had described himself online as a socialist and trade unionist.
In Purkis’s social media accounts he responded to the question, “What’s a good collective noun for Tories?” by saying “a tumour of Tories” and then subsequently a “cesspit of Tories”.
When Purkis’s claims came to light, the hearing collapsed over allegations that he had also shown a “significant prejudice against Christians”.
A ruling from the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office supported by the senior president of the tribunals and the lord chancellor said that Purkis’s comments amounted to misconduct.
The ruling noted that social media guidance for the judiciary states that judges “should be aware of the risk of undermining trust and confidence in the judiciary by expressing, or appearing to endorse, views which could cast doubt on their objectivity”.
It said that Purkis was at the time hearing a “strongly disputed and politically sensitive case”. The claimant, a teacher, who remained anonymous to protect the identity of a pupil, was suing Nottinghamshire county council and one of its primary schools for victimisation for whistleblowing, unfair dismissal and discrimination on the grounds of her Christian beliefs.
• Teacher’s trans row tribunal collapses over anti-Tory slurs
During that hearing the claimant’s representative unearthed tweets posted by Purkis, which the ruling said were “of a political nature” and which therefore “called into question his impartiality, integrity and propriety as a judicial office holder”. It noted that in one post on Twitter/X, Purkis had responded to the comment, “Only atheists should be allowed to run for office” with “Damn right, you won’t catch us killing in the name of our non-god”. He also suggested that the collective noun for Conservatives should be a “tumour”.
Referring to another commentator on the social media site who had said that Christians were “worse than woke”, Purkis responded: “If they are so f***ing super how comes there is so much shit going on in the world.”
The ruling also noted that as a result of his posts, the panel recused itself after six days of an eight-day hearing, “at significant cost and inconvenience to the parties and the public purse”.
Pavel Stroilov, the lawyer for the teacher, made the application for the panel to recuse itself. He asked ­members to assess the posts “from an assumed standpoint of a fair-minded and informed observer. That observer needs to consider whether there is a possibility of bias”.
Stroilov argued that it would not be sufficient for Purkis to step down, since the other two members had presided over the trial together for more than six days and would be perceived as influenced by him. They agreed that “doubt would arise” as to their impartiality.
The ruling is the latest in a number of disciplinary findings this year. Tan ­Ikram, the deputy chief magistrate, who spared three women convicted of terrorism in relation to anti-Israel ­protests from serving a jail sentence, was disciplined over his behaviour on social media. Simon Myerson KC, who sits as a recorder, was also reprimanded over social media activity.