Judge fines Office of Public Prosecutions, admonishes boss and orders rehiring of solicitor sacked over ill-health

A FEDERAL judge has admonished one of the state’s most senior law officers as being “almost contemptuous” under cross examination over a sacked solicitor.

Craig Hyland is Victoria’s Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (SPP). He was appointed in March 2009, bringing with him more than 20 years experience in criminal prosecutions in New South Wales as well as expertise in public sector management. He graduated with a Bachelor of Jurisprudence in 1983 and Bachelor of Law in 1985. He was admitted to practice as a solicitor in 1986.

A FEDERAL judge has admonished one of the state’s most senior law officers as being “almost contemptuous” under cross examination over a sacked solicitor.

Judge Phillip Burchardt ordered the Office of Public Prosecutions to rehire the solicitor sacked because of his ill-health and depression.

In the Federal Circuit Court he ordered the OPP pay a pecuniary penalty of $10,000 and $93,000 in unpaid wages to sacked solicitor Anthony Grant. He also ordered that Mr Grant be reinstated.

The judge also admonished OPP boss Craig Hyland as being “almost contemptuous” under cross examination and showing disdain for the proceedings.

The court heard Mr Grant had a history of anxiety and was subject to bouts of depression. His doctor said his erratic behaviour at work could be attributed to his illness.

The young solicitor had worked at the OPP since 2007 and was an exemplary employee until he broke his leg in 2010.

The break resulted in a lengthy spell away from work but when Mr Grant returned his work became erratic, he was often late and would make poor decisions.

His behaviour became more erratic towards the end of 2011 and shortly later Mr Grant told his superiors he was suffering from depression.

Judge Burchardt said while Mr Grant’s supervisors were sympathetic misconduct proceedings were still launched.

Mr Grant was ordered to take time off work and to gather a medical report on his condition in February 2012.

His physician, Dr Gregory Frean, cleared him to work soon after but Mr Hyland refused to allow him back.

“One of the extraordinary aspects of this case is that Mr Hyland, without any further investigation, simply decided that he was a better practitioner of medicine than Dr Frean.

“This is, of course, consistent with the view I have formed of Mr Hyland’s view of the world.”

The OPP eventually dismissed Mr Grant because of his erratic conduct.

Judge Burchardt found his erratic behaviour could be attributed to his illness.

“In truth the applicant’s conduct arose wholly out of his medical condition and the respondent well knew of the medical condition.”

In his decision Judge Burchardt said he formed a negative view of Mr Hyland as a witness and thought his evidence on why he sacked Mr Grant was unreliable.

But Judge Burchardt stressed Mr Hyland was not wittingly untruthful.

“He is a man very used to being king of all he surveys in this organisation and having a particularly peremptory way about him,” the judge said.

“His answers to the applicant’s counsel were, at times, almost openly contemptuous.

“Indeed, his entire demeanour suggested a certain disdain for the proceeding as a whole.”

Mr Grant’s lawyer Maurice Addison said his client was pleased with the “appropriate result”.

Office of Public Prosecutions spokeswoman Lisa Walker said it planned to appeal to the Federal Court.