Former Turf Club board member celebrates ‘win’ in court challenge to ICAC grandstand findings

The Territory’s former corruption watchdog failed to afford an ex Darwin Turf Club board member procedural fairness and acted outside his jurisdiction when making findings against him.

THE Territory’s former corruption watchdog failed to afford an ex Darwin Turf Club board member procedural fairness and acted outside his jurisdiction when making findings against him, a court has ruled.

Damien Moriarty sued former Independent Commissioner Against Corruption, Ken Fleming QC, in the Supreme Court after Mr Fleming found him “guilty of unsatisfactory conduct and breach of public trust” in relation to a $12m government grant in 2019.

In handing down her ruling on Thursday, Justice Judith Kelly upheld Mr Moriarty’s challenge to the findings on the basis that Mr Fleming did not give him a chance to respond to his report into the grant.

“The defendant failed to afford the plaintiff procedural fairness by failing to ensure that he was given notice of a proposal to make findings of unsatisfactory conduct and breach of public trust against him in his capacity as a member of the Darwin Turf Club board, and to afford him the opportunity to respond to such findings,” she said.

“The defendant failed to give the plaintiff a reasonable opportunity to respond to the proposed findings that he was guilty of unsatisfactory conduct and breach of public trust in his capacity as a member of the Darwin Turf Club board as required by … the ICAC Act, and accordingly had no jurisdiction to make those findings against him.”

Former Darwin Turf Club board member Damien Moriarty.

Speaking outside court after the verdict, Mr Moriarty said he was still reviewing the full 98 page judgment but was “relieved by this win”.

“I am limited by what I can say as I have a significant complaint accepted by the Inspector of the ICAC that has paused pending the outcome of this case,” he said.

“It has been a long and arduous road and I thank my family, my friends and supporters for backing me.”

But Mr Moriarty said the ruling did not undo “the personal toll it has taken on me and others at the DTC at the hands of the NT ICAC”.

“The mental cost, the destruction of friendships, the erosion of belief in a fair go, while bound to silence, is not something I would wish upon anyone,” he said.

“I have read with empathy recent stories around Australia of those who have committed suicide and suffered self-harm in light of actions by other ICACs.

“I am also painfully aware board members have (had) significant mental health challenges during this two year long saga.”

Mr Moriarty said he had been left with no choice but to take court action “at immense financial and personal cost” in “seeking to restore my damaged reputation” after the ICAC “refused multiple requests for mediation to resolve my matter out of court”.

“While this Supreme Court decision only concerned my role at the DTC, I understand it has many in the community and the racing fraternity, questioning the integrity of the process that occurred throughout this debacle,” he said.

“The ICAC spared no taxpayer expense and fought my case tooth and nail from day one.”

First Turf Club ICAC court challenge decision ‘could throw the cat among the pigeons’

AN impending decision in a Supreme Court challenge to a corruption watchdog finding could have implications for separate litigation brought by the former Darwin Turf Club (DTC) chairman, a court has heard.

Former DTC board member, Damien Moriarty, sued former Independent Commissioner Against Corruption, Ken Fleming QC, over a report into a $12m grant to the club to build a grandstand in 2019.

Justice Judith Kelly is due to hand down her findings in that case on Thursday and in a brief hearing on Wednesday, said it “may throw the cat among the pigeons” in relation to a second challenge by former DTC chairman, Brett Dixon.

Justice Kelly said the two challenges to the ICAC report shared at least one common issue, “the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the publication (of the report) on the ICAC website”.

She said, regardless of where she landed on that question, an appeal was likely in the offing, which could potentially render further argument on the question a waste of time.

Brett Dixon.

“It’s going to be either a complete win for one and a complete loss for the other, or a complete win for the other and a complete loss for the one – in that particular issue – either it’s going to be found to be lawful or not,” she said.

“So you’ll have a decision of this court on that issue, whichever party has lost it may wish to appeal, and you would be relitigating that same issue before the appeal is heard.”

Mr Dixon’s lawyer, Duncan McConnel SC, agreed “that may be so”.

“(But) it might also be that the way the events fall out, if there is an appeal brought on foot at some stage, one or other of the parties in this matter might seek to be joined in with that appeal,” he said.

Justice Kelly said Thursday’s decision could also lead to further complications.

“The other possibility that had occurred to me is that whichever party is on the losing side of that particular sub-decision might say ‘Well you should recuse yourself’,” she said.

“’You’ve already decided that issue, how are you going to bring an open and unbiased mind to deciding it again?’”.

But Mr McConnel said “I think we’re trying to deal with those issues in the abstract” while the decision was still pending.

“I think, between us, what we’ll do is work out some of the implications that fall from the decision and probably come back before your honour for some further directions,” he said.

The hearing in Mr Dixon’s challenge to ICAC’s Turf Club report is due to be heard together with a challenge from his business partner, Matthew Moss, from July 28.