Super Retail asks court to suppress details of lawsuit by former employee Rebecca Farrell

Scandal-plagued Super Retail has rushed to court trying to suppress parts of the lawsuit brought by its former legal boss.

Lawyers for Rebecca Farrell have argued against suppression of key documents in the case in Federal Court. Picture: John Feder

Lawyers acting for Super Retail Group have appeared before the Federal Court in Sydney to suppress key documents relating to a looming court battle with its sacked chief legal officer Rebecca Farrell.

As details surrounding allegations of workplace misconduct including a secret affair between chief executive Anthony Heraghty and head of HR for Super Retail Group were likely to be aired, lawyers for both sides appeared before Justice John Halley on Wednesday afternoon.

Ms Farrell on Monday filed proceedings in the Federal Court against the company to enforce a settlement agreement relating to her dismissal claiming she was bullied, harassed and victimised.
Justice Halley noted concerns about the public release of an affidavit by a person involved in the court case, that could disclose new details of the scandal that has erupted around Super Retail.

Lawyers for both Super Retail and Ms Farrell, represented by specialist workplace law firm Harmers Workplace Lawyers, were careful in their discussions and arguments before Justice Halley so as not to release details of an affidavit.

Justice Halley later agreed to redact some parts of the affidavit, which is believed to help shield the identity of a whistleblower that works or previously worked for Super Retail.

Lawyers for Super Retail also asked for Ms Farrell’s statement of claim in the case not to be released or published, or allowed to be published, while they argued about certain sections of that document as well. The retailer’s lawyers also sought to keep confidential the details of the alleged settlement made with Ms Farrell if the statement of claim is eventually released.

It is unknown why Super Retail’s lawyers have asked for the termination settlement to redacted from any documents released to the public.

Rebecca Farrell arrives at Federal Court in Sydney with lawyer Michael Harmer. Picture: John Feder/The Australian.

Justice Halley said after a brief review of the documents there was an argument that some contained “untested” statements which could see its public release contested.

However, he said that just because the statement of claim might have untested allegations doesn’t mean that should stop it being publicly released.

He expressed doubts the “entire” statement of claim could be suppressed.
He said it was “only a question of time” and once the material became public, its content and the ability of the parties to suppress details becomes more difficult.

Lawyers appearing for Ms Farrell claimed Super Retail was trying to make the whole case confidential while at the same time as having “repudiated” a termination settlement with Ms Farrell regarding her sacking.

“We say there was (a settlement) and it has been repudiated and not performed,” lawyers for Ms Farrell told the court.

Harmers have claimed that Ms Farrell had reached a settlement with Super Retail on May 6 and that she was now trying to enforce that settlement.

It has been a frenetic few days of court applications and legal action surrounding the workplace scandals now swirling around Super Retail.

Justice Halley ruled that for the time being the statement of claim would be kept confidential and not released to the public, including the media, as it could be “premature and unhelpful to the potential resolution of these proceedings”. Those proceedings, to be argued at a future date, related to if a settlement with Ms Farrell was made and if it was enforced.

The story so far

On Monday Ms Farrell, filed proceedings in the Federal Court against the company, its chief executive Anthony Heraghty and chairman Sally Pitkin to enforce a settlement agreement relating to her dismissal, claiming she was bullied, harassed, victimised and ultimately sacked when she raised “serious corporate governance breaches”.

A statement on Tuesday from workplace law firm Harmers, which is representing several former executives at Super Retail including Ms Farrell, said Ms Farrell would also pursue claims around a conflict of interest by CEO Anthony Heraghty for failing to disclose a secret relationship he was having with the head of HR, Jane Kelly.

Super Retail chairman Ms Pitkin, a veteran boardroom director who has also sat on the boards of Link Group, Star Entertainment and Billabong International, has also been named in the looming case before the Federal Court that is likely to reveal a string of scandalous claims against the retailer, whose chains include Rebel, Supercheap Auto, Macpac and BCF.

Super Retail CEO Anthony Heraghty. Jane Dempster/The Australian.

According to Federal Court documents, Super Retail non-executive director Annabelle Chaplain, a former banker and director of Seven Group, has also been named as a respondent to the lawsuit.

Ms Chaplain is chair of the Super Retail board risk and sustainability committee. Other respondents include Kevin Fig­ueiredo, Super Retail’s chief people and safety officer, and another person listed under the pseudonym “Mx Whistleblower”.

The Australian last week reported that Super Retail went to the Federal Court in a pre-emptive strike to suppress potentially commercially confidential, sensitive or inflammatory material from being made public if a court case by aggrieved former staff was launched.

Separately to Wednesday’s most recent action in the Federal Court, Ms Farrell and former co-secretary Amelia Berczelly, have filed an action in the Fair Work Commission citing contraventions involving the dismissal of their employment.

Originally published as Super Retail asks court to suppress details of lawsuit by former employee Rebecca Farrell