A lawyer who was accused of improper conduct has had the allegations dismissed by a Disciplinary Tribunal.

Norman MacDonald came under fire for “irrelevantly and improperly” questioning the sexual orientation of a witness in a Supreme Court case over the termination of a teacher.

Mr MacDonald however denied allegations that he had acted improperly.

While a Disciplinary Tribunal was appointed to hear the complaint, a notice published last month in the Official Gazette stated that the charges had been dismissed on October 5 last year because it had not moved forward in a reasonable time.

The notice said: “The Tribunal dismissed the charges against Mr MacDonald and ruled that to proceed further would, in all the circumstances, be unfair, and prejudicial to Mr MacDonald and amount to a violation of his constitutional right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time.”

Mr MacDonald, who had worked in the Attorney-General's Chambers, was criticised by then-Chief Justice Ian Kawaley in a 2016 judgment about his cross examination of Karen Clemons, a former teacher who sued the Minister of Education.

Mr Justice Kawaley said Mr MacDonald, who represented the Minister of Education in the civil action, quizzed Ms Clemons “quite irrelevantly and improperly” about her sexual orientation.

The judge said the question was “stunningly unreasonable” and had “no conceivable relevance to the facts in issue”.

The Bar Council asked its Professional Complaints Committee to investigate Mr MacDonald's conduct and, in June 2018, he pleaded not guilty to improper conduct contrary to the Barristers’ Code of Professional Conduct.

In the complaint, it was alleged that Mr MacDonald unreasonably questioned a witness about her sexual orientation when he knew or should have known that it had no relevance to the facts in issue and that such questioning could or would have humiliated or embarrassed the witness.

Mr MacDonald however claimed in a judicial review application that the Bermuda Bar Association “ruined” his career and caused him “humiliation” and “loss of dignity” through its complaints.

He added that he was a longstanding supporter of gay rights and claimed his treatment by the BBA had caused him emotional distress, anxiety, sleeplessness, flashbacks, nausea, vomiting and headaches.

The tribunal ruled in December 2019 that Mr MacDonald had a right to a fair hearing of the charge within a reasonable time.