Tribunal begins hearing Dr Giang Thu Nguyen’s $1m compo claim against Adelaide Uni and Professor Joshua Ross over alleged sexual assault

An academic seeking $1m compo has told a tribunal about the night she allegedly had non-consensual sex with a senior colleague – who denies all wrongdoing.

A top academic seeking $1m compensation has given confronting evidence to a tribunal about allegedly having non-consensual sex with a senior colleague – who denies all wrongdoing.

On Wednesday, Dr Giang Thu Nguyen’s claim against Professor Joshua Ross and the University of Adelaide began in the SA Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Giving evidence, Dr Nguyen rejected assertions by Prof Ross’ counsel that her claims about the alleged assault were inconsistent.

Dr Nguyen said anything she had said about being “enthusiastic” on the night had to be considered in its full context.

She said a friend had told her not to blame herself, and she had replied: “For all I know, I could been very enthusiastic about it and I shouldn’t have drunk so much.”

“(At that time) I was in shock, I was in denial,” she said.

Professor Joshua Ross leaving the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in Adelaide on April 20. Picture: Matt Loxton

“Josh was one of the people that I trusted and respected most at the School (of Mathematical Sciences) … if he had done something wrong, I was trying to decide how it could have happened.

“I was trying to tell myself, to convince myself, that the reality that Josh raped me did not happen.”

Dr Nguyen said she “could not remember anything” about her time in Prof Ross’ hotel room “apart from flashes of sexual intercourse”.

She conceded she had “drunk excessively before” in her life, and experienced a “patchy” memory as a result, “but not to the extent of what happened that night”.

“My case is that I was too intoxicated to give any valid consent, if there was consent given at all,” she said.

“When someone is too intoxicated to give valid consent, that’s not considered consent.”

Asked if, on the night of the incident, she was aware of “the risks of over-drinking”, Dr Nguyen suggested the question was unfair.

“There’s a risk of having a hangover and a risk of getting raped,” she said. “I was not thinking about the risk of getting raped.”

Dr Nguyen has asserted she was sexually harassed by Prof Ross when he had sex with her – despite her being too drunk to consent – after a maths retreat at Glenelg in November 2019.

She has further asserted the university failed to adequately investigate her complaint.

Prof Ross has denied the assertion, saying Dr Nguyen was a “willing and consensual” sex partner and noting SA Police opted not to charge him with an offence.

The university has stood by its investigation, saying there was “an insufficient basis” on which to “make a positive finding” that a sexual assault occurred.

Professor Joshua Ross denies he sexually assaulted University of Adelaide colleague Dr Giang Thu Nguyen at a maths conference.

Opening the hearing, Kerry Clark SC, for Dr Nguyen, said the consequences of her client’s drunken sexual encounter with Prof Ross were “so distressing” that she “could not return” to the career she loved.

Her client was, she said, seeking $970,948 compensation – $230,000 in damages and the remainder for lost wages, entitlements and future expenses.

Ms Clark stressed the hearing was not a criminal prosecution for sexual assault, meaning the tribunal did not have to find Dr Nguyen’s allegations proven beyond reasonable doubt.

She conceded her client had consumed between “14 and 15 standard drinks in a short period of time” prior to the alleged sexual assault.

“The question is whether a person has engaged in unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature in circumstances in which a reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances, would have appreciated the other person would be harassed, humiliated or intimidated,” she said.

“Sexual conduct of the type alleged will always be unwelcome if the person is too intoxicated to give consent.

“But it’s not just about what the alleged perpetrator thought – it’s about whether a reasonable person in their shoes should have appreciated their conduct might have caused offence.

“Our case will be that Prof Ross did have that appreciation … if he did not, the question for this tribunal is: Should a reasonable person have realised it?”

Dr Giang Thu Nguyen.

Professor Joshua Ross.

Prof Ross – who sat in the public gallery with his wife – became emotional as his barrister, Stephen Apps, rejected Dr Nguyen’s assertions.

He said the academics had discussed their work, the university’s hierarchy and Dr Nguyen’s past relationships while drinking.

“Dr Nguyen said Prof Ross would soon be running the Maths School, that she was fond of him and wished she had met someone like him earlier … he was embarrassed by the comment,” he said.

Mr Apps said CCTV showed Dr Nguyen “on her feet, walking completely unaided with what appears to be not a care in the world” back to the hotel with Prof Ross.

He said she kissed Prof Ross and said she was “thinking about coming” to his room, and that he “foolishly” replied that “sounded good”.

“Contrary to what’s been said, Dr Nguyen – although affected by alcohol – was a willing participant,” he said.

“Any description of the activity between them would indicate she was not, in any sense, passive.”

Mr Apps said Prof Ross was “struck by guilt” and ended the sexual activity, which appeared to “annoy” Dr Nguyen but they parted on “what he thought were good terms”.

He said Prof Ross and Dr Nguyen agreed they should tell no one about the sex, but that his client also conceded he would tell his wife.

Dr Nguyen’s disclosures to others, he said, were inconsistent and, in some cases, included her conceding she “could have been very enthusiastic” in the room.

“(She) was her spreading her account of what happened in case Prof Ross’s wife took umbrage about what happened in that hotel room,” he said.

“In a nutshell, they were both affected by alcohol, they both acted stupidly, they did something they might not have done if sober.

“But the critical point is they were fully conscious for the sexual activity to which they both consented … there was no harassment.”

Dr Giang Thu Nguyen arrives for the first day of her case against Professor Joshua Ross and the University of Adelaide. Picture: Sean Fewster.

In her evidence, Dr Nguyen became emotional – as did Prof Ross – as CCTV of their return to the hotel was played multiple times.

Asked if she was “reluctant to watch” the footage because it “clearly showed” her walking unaided, Dr Nguyen said that was not the case.

“I’m reluctant to look at the clip because it’s distressing for me think about that night,” she said.

She said she had hoped CCTV footage from the night would help her “know what happened” to her.

“I wanted to know what happened between the kiss and when I woke up with his penis inside of me … I was struggling to understand how Josh could do this to me,” she said.

“I wanted more information about that night because clearly Josh was not going to tell me about it.”

The hearing continues.