Territory Stories

The Supreme Court of Australia Transcript of Proceedings Between Peter Julian Hansen (Plaintiff) and Northern Land Council (Defendant) pages 52-117

Details:

Title

The Supreme Court of Australia Transcript of Proceedings Between Peter Julian Hansen (Plaintiff) and Northern Land Council (Defendant) pages 52-117

Other title

Tabled paper 807

Collection

Tabled Papers for 8th Assembly 1997 - 2001; Tabled Papers; ParliamentNT

Date

1998-12-01

Description

Tabledby Shane Stone

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.

Language

English

Subject

Tabled papers

File type

application/pdf

Use

Copyright

Copyright owner

See publication

License

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C1968A00063

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/297025

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/391962

Page content

MR SOUTHWOOD: Morrison. HIS HONOUR: Morrison?---Morrison. Ray Morrison. MR SOUTHWOOD: Yes. So, in fact, Mr Ray Morrison was the deputy director?---That's right. Mr Wes Miller was, in effect, an acting deputy director, was he, or - - - ?---No, he wasn't, in effect. What Mick had decided back in December was that he would shift his deputy even further sideways. That is, Mr Morrison?---That is Mr Morrison. Because they had this deep hatred of each other, they could - and he was - the deputy director was described in the most disparaging - - I dont want to digress on those matters, Mr Hansen, -but what was, in fact, Mr Miller's position, if anything, as at 28 January '93?---The best way I can describe it was that he was to be put in a position under the deputy director but was, in fact, to be - in reality - given the work of the deputy director. So, he shoved the deputy sideways. Right. Now, either during that meeting between Mr Dodson, Mr Miller and Mr Tichner,. or subsequently on 28 January 1993, did you receive a telepho.ne call from Mr Dodson?---Yes, I did. .Where were you when you received the telephone call?---In my office. And can you recall whether that was during a meeting with Mr Tichner or after a meeting?---It was while - it was while the director was in the minister's office and a meeting had taken place between the director and the minister. So it was your understanding that the minister wasn't there when Mr Dodson phoned you?---I don't know whether he was or not but it was taking place in the ministers office. In any event, what did Mr Dodson tell you during that telephone conversation with you? MR O'LOUGHLIN: I object, Your Honour. It's clearly going to be hearsay evidence about what Mr Dodson was - heard from the minister. It's second-hand evidence. Mr Dodson's going to be called as a witness and he can give that evidence. MR SOUTHWOOD: Well, it's not so much to prove the content of the conversation but to prove the information that Mr Dodson 45/ld Hansen 101 P.J. HANSEN XN 18/11/98