Lattouf’s case will ‘fail at a hurdle of her own construction’, ABC silk says
Ian Neil SC has started the ABC’s oral closing submissions.
He is making plain what he says the case is not about.
One thing it’s not about is the expressions of political opinion.
It’s not about discrimination.
It’s not a case about differential treatment.
It’s not a case about bespoke directions.
It’s not a case about impartiality.
It’s not an unfair dismissal case. It’s not a case about the fairness of anything that was done to the applicant, to Ms Lattouf.
Neil also said that Lattouf’s case would “fail at a hurdle of her own construction” if it was found she was dismissed because of the Human Rights Watch post, given she also argued this post was factual, and not an expression of her political opinion.
As we’ve covered earlier, Lattouf was let go after three days into a five-day fill-in stint on ABC Radio Sydney’s Mornings program when she shared the post that said Israel had used starvation as a “weapon of war” in Gaza.
The ABC’s submissions continue.
Key events
‘She did something she was not supposed to do’: ABC lawyer
Neil, for the ABC, says Lattouf was not taken off air because she expressed a political opinion, but because she ignored instruction.
She was taken off air because she did something she was not supposed to do.
In the week, the week, she was at the ABC. That was the real reason.
She was told, in effect, not to post anything relating to the conflict in Israel and Gaza during the week she was with the ABC.
ABC leaders not concerned by Lattouf’s beliefs: Neil
Neil says the ABC rejects the proposition that the broadcaster’s managing director, David Anderson, and the former chair Ita Buttrose were not concerned by the political opinion of Lattouf. They only cared that she expressed the opinion, Neil said.
Fagir, for Lattouf, has argued in his earlier submission that the ABC cared what Lattouf thought, and that she expressed it.
But back to Neil, he told the court that Anderson may have “misinterpreted” Lattouf’s social media presence when he described it as “full of antisemitic hatred”, but that it was a reasonably available interpretation.
He did not mind or know or care about the holding of her political opinion … what he was concerned with was, that she, in her past social media activity, had indelibly associated herself with one side.
That was his exclusive concern.
Neil went on to say that it was clear from the material before the court that Anderson had only ever been concerned with the expression of the opinions.
He said this evidence included when Anderson referred to “the Antoinette issue”, and “what her socials are full of, not what she thinks”, Neil said.
The notes of Anderson were revealing, Neil said, as “what it doesn’t say is: ‘I’m not sure we can have someone on air who thinks this’.
“He expressly doesn’t say that. No one ever says that.”
The concept that people at the ABC were concerned by Lattouf’s opinion, rather than her expression of it, was part of “the dark subterranean current that underlines the applicant’s case theory”, Neil said.
His submissions continue.
Lattouf’s case will ‘fail at a hurdle of her own construction’, ABC silk says
Ian Neil SC has started the ABC’s oral closing submissions.
He is making plain what he says the case is not about.
One thing it’s not about is the expressions of political opinion.
It’s not about discrimination.
It’s not a case about differential treatment.
It’s not a case about bespoke directions.
It’s not a case about impartiality.
It’s not an unfair dismissal case. It’s not a case about the fairness of anything that was done to the applicant, to Ms Lattouf.
Neil also said that Lattouf’s case would “fail at a hurdle of her own construction” if it was found she was dismissed because of the Human Rights Watch post, given she also argued this post was factual, and not an expression of her political opinion.
As we’ve covered earlier, Lattouf was let go after three days into a five-day fill-in stint on ABC Radio Sydney’s Mornings program when she shared the post that said Israel had used starvation as a “weapon of war” in Gaza.
The ABC’s submissions continue.
We’re off again in the federal court
There’s some brief comments for Lattouf before the ABC starts its closing submissions.
Amanda Meade
ABC will today conclude its $1.1m defence
After a full day of closing submissions from Antoinette Lattouf’s legal team on Thursday, today will see the ABC wrap up its defence of the unlawful termination case.
The broadcaster will defend its decision to take Lattouf off air in December 2023, a decision it has always maintained was not a termination.
“The ABC maintains that it did not terminate Ms Lattouf’s one-week contract unlawfully but we do obviously understand that this is an impost on public funds, and that is why we have tried to attempt to settle this matter,” the acting managing director, Melanie Kleyn, said this week, of the case which has cost $1.1m in external lawyers.
Yesterday, we heard Lattouf’s barrister Oshie Fagir tell the court that Ita Buttrose’s emails “hammering” executives with complaints were influential in her sacking.
Fagir said the former chair was one of four ABC figureheads who played a pivotal role in the removal of the casual host from air and her “attitude never wavered at any point”.
Welcome
Hi, I’m Nino Bucci, and I’ll be watching day eight of the Antoinette Lattouf v ABC unlawful termination claim.
Today we expect to hear the conclusion of closing arguments.
The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9.45am and is live-streamed on the federal court’s YouTube channel.
When final submissions have concluded Justice Darryl Rangiah will retire to consider his verdict.
