The ACT Law Society and its professional standards manager have successfully defended claims they discriminated against, vilified and victimised a black Canberra lawyer.
The claims of Emmanuel Tam Ezekiel-Hart a solicitor who came to Australia from Nigeria more than a decade ago, centred around an alleged incident at the society's office and its decision to refuse him a practising certificate.
On February 23, 2016, Mr Ezekiel-Hart went to the society's office for help filling out an online application for a practising certificate. A lawyer can't practise without the certificate.
He was granted access to a secure area of the office and was being helped at a computer. But what happened next was the subject of dispute. Mr Ezekiel-Hart claims staff received a phone call, and that he heard the society's professional standards manager Rob Reis telling staff to send him away. When the staff returned they shut the webpage down, and told him he had to leave, he said.
He later submitted an online application, but it was rejected by the society on March 21, 2016.
In a complaint referred to the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal by the ACT Human Rights Commission in June, Mr Ezekiel-Hart claimed the society and Mr Reis had discriminated against him.
He said the society's decision to not approve his practising certificate application was made because of his race or political convictions.
He said he was victimised in these events and others because of complaints he had made to the government and to court about his rights.
He claimed he was vilified when Mr Reis told another man, in essence, "don't go to Emmanuel" for help.
The society and Mr Reis denied the accusations. Mr Reis and the two staff present at the time denied the manager knew of Mr Ezekiel-Hart's presence in the office until after he left.
In regards to Mr Reis telling someone not to go to Mr Ezekiel-Hart for help, the manager told the tribunal he had said this because Mr Ezekiel-Hart did not have a certificate, and so could not provide advice.
Further, the society said the decision to not approve Mr Ezekiel-Hart's application for a certificate followed an evidence-based finding that he was not a "fit and proper person" as required.
In one claim aired in the tribunal, Mr Ezekiel-Hart said he was referred to as a "Blackman" in an email sent by Mr Reis, which showed, he said, a racist and discriminatory attitude.
But the tribunal found Mr Reis had replied to an email from Mr Ezekiel-Hart and used the the lawyer's own description of himself within quotation marks to deny allegations.
"Rest assured your so called "Blackman" status has nothing whatsoever to do with the Law Society's dealings with you in the past, the present, or the future," the email from Mr Reis read.
These was not the society's first dealings with Mr Ezekiel-Hart. There was a history of litigation between the two parties in 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2013 in various courts and on various legal basis, the tribunal noted. In each Mr Ezekiel-Hart lost, and had costs awarded against him. He owed the society a substantial amount of money.
The tribunal heard how as early as 2011 the Law Society had written to Mr Ezekiel-Hart to say that the sum of the cost orders awarded to them at that stage was more than $63,000. These costs were not paid, and so the society pursued his bankruptcy. He became bankrupt in 2013.
In a decision handed down on January 24, the tribunal dismissed Mr Ezekiel-Hart's claims. Senior Member Laura Beacroft found the tribunal did not discriminate against him because of his race or political convictions. The tribunal further found the society and Mr Reis did not victimise or vilify Mr Ezekiel-Hart.