RSM gender case 'hopeless'
Hopeless. A waste of time.
That is how a Federal Court yesterday described a failed sex discrimination action by Perth accountant Angela Gaffney against her former partners at accounting firm RSM Bird Cameron.
Federal Court judge John Gilmour said Ms Gaffney had not presented any evidence that went even close to supporting allegations against her former partners.
Justice Gilmour made the comments yesterday while hearing an application by RSM Bird Cameron for a special order to cover its legal costs in successfully fighting Ms Gaffney's case.
The judge handed down a summary judgment three weeks ago throwing out Ms Gaffney's claim against her former partners over being forced into compulsory retirement in March, 2009.
Ms Gaffney's ousting came after being on sick leave for more than eight months. She had failed to provide information to the firm to make a claim under an income protection insurance policy.
After walking out of a meeting with senior partners in June 2008, she communicated with RSM through lawyers and alleged she was suffering stress from workplace bullying and sexual discrimination.
At hearings last year of an application by RSM for the case to be thrown out, Justice Gilmour refused an application by Ms Gaffney to cross-examine RSM national chairman Kim Hutchinson on an affidavit he had filed.
The judge also refused an application by Ms Gaffney to put on evidence that might be used as a basis for cross-examining Mr Hutchinson, who had provided an extended account of his firm's dealings with the ousted partner.
In his judgment, Justice Gilmour said the decision by Ms Gaffney to not put on evidence ahead of the hearing of the summary judgment application had been deliberate and she "must live with the consequences of her forensic decisions".
After examining evidence put up by RSM, the judge found the firm's partners had adopted a measured and considered approach and "a transparent, caring and open process was extended" to Ms Gaffney. The only lack of candour was by her, the judge found.
Pushing yesterday for Ms Gaffney to be hit with an indemnity costs order to pay RSM's legal bills, the firm's barrister Martin Goldblatt told Justice Gilmour that his findings supported the contention that Ms Gaffney had taken the action for an "ulterior or malicious purpose".
Opposing Ms Gaffney being hit with an indemnity bill, expert costs lawyer David Garnsworthy said the threshold for cases being summarily dismissed in the Federal Court was lower than in other courts.
Mr Garnsworthy said a Federal judge did not have to find a case to be hopeless for it to be thrown out.
Justice Gilmour said there was no evidence that went even close to supporting the allegations against RSM. "Your client's case, on the material put before me, was hopeless, a waste of time," he said.
Ms Gaffney then stood up and asked the judge: "Can I speak please." The judge refused and called a brief adjournment so Mr Garnsworthy could talk with her.
They returned after about a 20 minute break and Mr Garnsworthy changed tack. Justice Gilmour reserved his decision.
