A very good summary of this conspiracy run by the LNP...
Ashby case a shocking spectacleDecember 14, 2012
Richard Ackland
Justice Steven Rares's judgment on Wednesday in the Federal Court made for gripping reading.
The interplay of newspaper reptiles, the unlovely Speaker of the House of Representatives, his duplicitous staffers, desperate Liberals grasping for power, a no-win, no-fee flack merchant and over-the-top lawyering - was all too much enjoyment for one day.
As has now been widely known, the core finding of the judge was the manner in which the sexual harassment proceedings were brought by James Ashby against Peter Slipper were an abuse of the court's process.The judge explained the inclusion of allegations about misuse of Cabcharge dockets and a previous sexual relationship between Slipper and a young member of his staff, were designed to injure the parliamentarian for no legitimate forensic purpose.
They were irrelevant and scandalous, and were designed to maximise and inflame the media coverage.
Those superfluous flourishes were withdrawn when the statement of claim was filed a month after the originating application.
The real purpose of this litigation was to fire-up an attack not just on Slipper but on the government, and to seek to bring about its downfall.
The sexual harassment allegation had the consistency of snowflakes. Throughout their smut-infused game of footsies, Ashby flirted with Slipper and he responded with the alluring qualities for which he is justly infamous. Instinctively, there is a need for a good, long shower after reading the electronic conversations of these love birds.
The judge put it this way: ''There was no hint in contemporaneous texts with his friends, of Mr Ashby feeling upset as a result of sexual harassment. Rather those texts suggested that he was planning to use the record of his texts with Mr Slipper to empower others in a way that would affect the balance of power in the House of Representatives.''
Ashby had no doubt about his purpose. In text messages to friends he said that in bringing his case he was making ''national decisions''. He also talked of ''saving the nation''.
Throughout, Ashby's hand was held by his solicitor, Michael Harmer, the famous workplace law guru from the eponymous law firm.
Rares again: ''To allow these proceedings to remain in the court would bring the administration of justice into disrepute among right-thinking people.''
Don't you just love the ''right-thinking people''? There's an implication that Ashby and Harmer might not be ''right-thinking''.
It's worse than that, because this would have to be one of the grubbiest, underhand, unmeritorious, political assaults on a government in recent democratic memory, fanned by leading adornments of the Liberal Party.But, there is more fun waiting in the wings. Often it is to be found right at the tail of a body of serious and meaningful judicial reasoning. And there it is on the last page under the heading of ''costs'', which to lawyers is the most important part of the dissertation.
Ashby's claims of sexual harassment involved ''relatively minor incidents'' and were even only likely to attract ''a very modest'' award of damages if he was successful.
By engaging the PR man Anthony McClellan at $550 an hour plus GST, on top of that portion of his own costs that could not be recovered from the other side, Ashby would have received virtually no damages or other compensation had he won the case.
Of course, he has the $50,000 for the ''commercial'' settlement in September of his claim against the Commonwealth.
Whacko the diddle, that amount is unlikely to spread far. The case was commenced under the Fair Work Act, which is a jurisdiction in which parties are not awarded costs.
However, Justice Rares said that because of the abuse of process involved with the conduct of the case, Ashby should pay Slipper's costs.
There was this bit, the last sentence: ''If any special order for costs is sought in consequence of the orders I will make today either party may apply within seven days.''
What should Ashby do, now that his shakedown has failed, and he's been landed with a whopping costs order against him?
Already, there's a looming conflict issue. He might sack Mr Harmer and get separate legal advice, which could urge him, within the seven-day deadline, to apply for an order of the court that Mr Harmer pay these costs.
The judge already has prepared the ground.
The case was brought, it seems, without ''genuine steps'' being taken to resolve the dispute. Instead, the tactic was shock and awe ambush with headlines, in a manner that used the court as the plaything of one of the litigants.
There's plenty of precedent for costs against lawyers in other abuse-of-process cases - the most famous in recent memory is that of Flower & Hart, another escapade uniquely populated by Queenslanders, including the then High Court judge Ian Callinan.
A company called White Industries had constructed a shopping centre at Caboolture Park for interests associated with the property developer George Herscu.
George was seeking to delay payment and as a tactic, he and his lawyers, Flower & Hart, commenced fraud proceedings against the builder.
There was no factual basis for the claim, but that didn't stop the case running for 150 days in the Federal Court.
Justice Goldberg awarded costs against Flower & Hart for the conduct of this spurious case. It was made all the more fascinating because Ian Callinan, QC, before his elevation, had been counsel advising Flower & Hart on the litigation.
Then we have the latest ignominy for the shadow attorney-general, Queenslander George Brandis.
Throughout the Ashby versus Slipper case he has been volunteering his foot-in-mouth observations, which bring little hope that in an Abbott government we'll have an attorney with dignity, let alone acumen.
Brandis has been the author of much posturing and silliness on legal issues.
In this instance, he objected to the Commonwealth settling its case with Ashby, which was done in the expectation proceedings could be long and expensive.
''This is further evidence of how dishonest and slippery this government is,'' he intoned, without a hint of shame.Read more:
www.theage.com.au/opinion/ashby-case-a-shocking-spectacle-20121213-2bcgg.html#ixzz2EyhiTR3k
