The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office has issued Employment Judge Tim Kenward with a formal warning after an investigation found a sustained pattern of delay across 46 tribunal matters.
The case, confirmed in a JCIO statement dated 22 June 2026, concerned outstanding judgments, written reasons, case management orders and reconsideration decisions across three regions between March 2023 and August 2024.
The complaint went beyond slow drafting. It alleged that Kenward had failed for an extended period to self-report the backlog to his leadership judges, despite standard guidance requiring judicial officeholders to raise delays rather than allow them to sit unseen within the system.
Kenward accepted responsibility, expressed remorse and referred to personal and professional pressures, but did not seek to excuse the conduct. The nominated investigating judge found that the delay and failure to self-report showed a lack of diligence and care expected of a judicial officeholder.
Regulatory context matters because judicial delay is not treated simply as an administrative inconvenience. The Guide to Judicial Conduct requires diligence in the discharge of judicial duties, while the investigation proceeded under the Judicial Conduct Rules 2023.
The JCIO said the delays created operational harm, risked harm to affected parties and caused reputational harm to the tribunal service. That is the key point for employment practitioners: late reasons and orders do not merely frustrate clients; they can affect appeal timing, settlement strategy, witness availability and confidence in case management.
The Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, with the agreement of Lord Chancellor David Lammy, accepted the nominated judge’s findings and issued a formal warning. The sanction sits within the disciplinary framework under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, under which misconduct sanctions run from formal advice through to removal from office.
In Kenward’s case, mitigation was important. The decision records that he was a relatively recently appointed salaried judge, had shown insight and remorse, had compelling personal mitigation and was no longer behind on his judgments.
The sanction will still be read closely by solicitors and barristers operating in the Employment Tribunals. Written reasons often determine whether an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal is realistic, whether a reconsideration application has merit and whether a client should keep spending money on a dispute that may already have become commercially disproportionate. A delayed case management order can also disturb preparation timetables, document production, witness planning and insurer reporting obligations.
The JCIO’s action against Employment Judge Tim Kenward means Employment Tribunals users should treat unexplained delay as a case-management risk to be tracked, documented and raised promptly where it affects appeal rights or client strategy.