NAAJA boss Priscilla Atkins denies ‘abusing’ loan scheme to purchase fleet of cars, court hears

The embattled legal aid boss told the court she used a loan scheme to buy a Mazda 2 Maxx, a Jeep Patriot, a Volkswagen Amarok and a Range Rover Sport, but denied claims it was wrongly used.

North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency chief executive Priscilla Atkins leaves the Federal Court after giving evidence on Monday. Picture: Pema Tamang Pakhrin

North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency chief executive Priscilla Atkins has denied “abusing” a novated lease scheme she used to buy a fleet of cars, including one worth more than $100,000.

Ms Atkins is suing the government-funded legal aid agency in the Federal Court in a bid to have it restrained from sacking her following a bitter falling out last year.

On Tuesday, Ms Atkins told the court she used the scheme to buy a Mazda 2 Maxx, a Jeep Patriot, a Volkswagen Amarok and a Range Rover Sport worth more than $120,000.

Ms Atkins agreed with counsel for NAAJA Robyn Sweet KC that the fact the vehicles were bought under a leasing agreement “doesn’t mean it’s not NAAJA’s money being utilised”.

But under cross examination by Ms Sweet she said the purchases had “the approval of the commonwealth Attorney-General” and denied “abusing the scheme”.

Ms Atkins agreed she had cashed out some of her leave in 2015 which meant she did not have enough left to cover the outstanding cost of the Range Rover and had taken out a $100,000 loan.

But she said the accrued leave “wasn’t supposed to cover the whole of the vehicle”.

“There was to be enough annual leave to pay out a percentage of the vehicle but not the entire vehicle,” she said.

“You would have to take out a personal loan for the balance.”

In re-examination, Ms Atkins’ own barrister Malcolm Harding SC asked her why she had rejected the suggestion she was “abusing the novated lease scheme by acquiring those vehicles”.

“Because I was entitled to lease agreements,” she said.

“I had purchased the Volkswagen Amarok outright before I commenced the Range Rover Sport.”

Ms Atkins also told the court she made a complaint to the Territory’s Independent Commissioner Against Corruption after a NAAJA accountant told her executive Madhur Evans had approved a $20,000 payment to chairwoman Colleen Rosas.

But she agreed with Ms Sweet that she “didn’t make any inquiries with NAAJA to check if, in fact, any such approval had been made” while she was on sick leave and had been suspended from duties.

“That would have been a prudent inquiry to make before you report it to ICAC, correct?” Ms Sweet asked.

“That is not correct,” Ms Atkins replied.

“I sent the complaint to ICAC on the advice that it is mandatory to report misconduct and corruption as an officer of an Aboriginal organisation.”

The trial continues on Wednesday.

NAAJA boss denies threat to sue for ‘millions’, invoking PM’s support

NT Aboriginal legal aid boss Priscilla Atkins has denied threatening to sue her employer “for millions” and “get a f — ing reference from the Prime Minister” after being accused of giving herself a pay rise, a court has heard.

Ms Atkins is suing the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency in the Federal Court over a bitter employment dispute which led to her purported sacking last year.

Under cross examination by NAAJA’s barrister Robyn Sweet KC on Monday, Ms Atkins agreed chairwoman Colleen Rosas had emailed her to ask her to produce a hard copy of her contract extension letter on November 14.

The following day, Ms Atkins said Ms Rosas accused her of having “put her signature on the letter”, to which she responded “You have accused me of criminal activity”.

“You said to her ‘I’m going to get a f — ing reference from the Prime Minister,” Ms Sweet said.

“And you said to her ‘I’m going to f — ing sue you for millions’, didn’t you?”

Ms Atkins responded: “I did not say (either of those things).”

“Ms Rosas accused me of giving myself a pay rise, making up my own salary and putting her (electronic) signature on my contract,” she said.

Ms Atkins said her IT access was then cut off on November 16 before she sent a series of emails to up to 30 NAAJA staffers who all either directly or indirectly reported to her as CEO.

NAAJA chief executive Priscilla Atkins said she had received ‘a large number of support letters’ after reaching out to colleagues. Picture: Pema Tamang Pakhrin

“So you were asking more junior NAAJA staff to send you a letter of support … without informing them of what Ms Rosas had said to you in the conversation on the 15th of November,” Ms Sweet said.

Ms Atkins replied: “That is correct.”

“You’d agree that those letters could have no bearing on the question of whether or not you had applied Ms Rosas’ signature to the document for your contract extension,” Ms Sweet said.

Ms Atkins replied: “That is correct.”

Ms Atkins said she knew her IT access had been cut off several days earlier because her emails were bouncing back but she was still able to obtain the letters, five of which she included in her affidavit.

“What had happened was that they had bounced back, I knew a lot of the staff and I sent it to their personal emails,” she said.

“I have a large number of support letters, they were all very good, of high standard.”

The trial continues before Justice Natalie Charlesworth on Tuesday.

NAAJA ignored corruption allegation it ‘did not take seriously’: Court

The Territory’s largest government-funded legal aid organisation ignored “corruption” allegations made by its embattled chief executive officer because it did not take them seriously, a court has heard.

North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency CEO Priscilla Atkins is suing the organisation in the Federal Court in a bid to stop it terminating her employment following a bitter falling out last year.

On the first day of a two week trial in Darwin on Monday, the court heard NAAJA’s board had asked auditor BDO Australia to provide a report regarding an allegation Ms Atkins had forged chairwoman Colleen Rosas’ signature on a $1.8m five-year contract extension.

Justice Natalie Charlesworth asked counsel for NAAJA, Robyn Sweet KC, why the board had not included an allegation made by Ms Atkins that another executive asked an external IT provider “to increase an invoice that had already been submitted after the services had been provided” in the terms of reference.

“I must say, from a governance point of view, that is a very serious allegation, because one can draw a number of inferences about why a person would do that — it is an allegation of corruption, it seems to me,” she said.

“I know that your evidence, your case in your submissions, is that they’re just operational, the CEO could have raised that at the time, (but) I’ll have to ask myself ‘Is that plausible?’.”

In response, Ms Sweet said the board had taken the view that Ms Atkins’ complaint “was poorly put together” and “seemed to be articulating personal (grievances)”.

“The complaint, the way it’s received and the way it’s presented, it’s done in an unprofessional manner, it can be hard to follow, there’s seven pages of dot points,” she said.

“What we’re asking you to find is the board took the view that it was sort of done as some sort of petty point scoring, some sort of personal vendetta or done through professional jealousy.”

Ms Sweet said the board had concluded the allegations were “not matters for us”.

“They were not involved in those operational matters, they didn’t feel that they could give a recommendation and they felt that they were matters, if they’re serious matters, then the CEO should have dealt with them at the time,” she said.

“It also goes to show that there was a breakdown in trust between the board and the CEO, so they’ve not really taken that complaint seriously.”

The trial continues on Monday afternoon when Ms Atkins is expected to take the stand.