High-profile judge Mr Justice Peter Smith was severely criticised today over his refusal to stand down in a case where he had “undoubted animosity” towards one of the parties.

Sir Anthony Clarke, the Master of the Rolls, who heads the Civil Court of Appeal, and two other leading judges, said Mr Justice Smith had been “intemperate” in the way he dealt with an application for him to stand down.

The case involved an application by trustees, one of whom was a partner in a firm of solicitors the judge had recently unsuccessfully tried to negotiate a job with.

It was “wholly inappropriate” for Mr Justice Peter Smith to cross-examine a witness from the solicitors and he “demonstrated animosity” towards the firm and its partners, said the appeal judges.

They also said the judge had got “somewhat carried away” in his treatment of a leading barrister, Peter Crampin, QC, who made the application for Mr Justice Smith to stand aside.

The judge had told Mr Crampin that his remarks to him “could have professional consequences”.

But the appeal court said Mr Crampin had behaved responsibly throughout and was completely justified in making the application.

They allowed an appeal by the trustees over the judge’s refusal to step down.

Mr Justice Peter Smith is best-known for hearing the Da Vinci Code case where he found that American author Dan Brown had not copied from earlier works for his blockbuster novel.

Sir Anthony explained that one of the claimants in the case was Paul Howell, a partner in solicitors Addleshaw Goddard.

There had been emails exchanged a month ago between the solicitors and the judge over unsuccessful negotiations for Mr Justice Peter Smith to join the firm, said Sir Anthony.

The appeal judge said the claimants say it is a case of “apparent bias” where a judge had displayed personal animosity towards one of the parties.

“A guide to judicial conduct issued by the Judges’ Council indicates that a current or recent business association with a party will usually mean that a judge should not sit on a case.”

Sir Anthony said there had been “lengthy discussions” between Addleshaw Goddard and Mr Justice Peter Smith about the judge joining them. In one email, the judge presses partner Simon Twigden for a decision over a position at the firm.

Mr Twigden replied, citing “financial reasons” for not “taking matters any further”.

The judge responded, citing the "considerable advantages" of being associated with someone like himself and his ”considerable disappointment“ at not being offered a job.

When he was again turned down, the judge wrote: “I found your first email insulting and your second condescending. I didn’t think the response should have been from you by emails. You should have the courtesy to speak to me.”

The judge added: “I feel you have wasted my time for several months. I am extremely disappointed you have allowed bean counters to prevail.”

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• The best legal yarns this Christmas
• Legal school 'earned £1m by exploiting bar course'
• Axe may fall on 5,000 more City lawyers