Oracle request denied to minimise oral evidence in sexual discrimination case

Oracle request denied to minimise oral evidence in sexual discrimination case

The vendor’s lawyer thought only crucial conversations between two employees required evidence to be submitted from the witness box but the Court disagrees

The Federal Court has denied Oracle’s request to reduce the amount of oral evidence submitted to its sexual discrimination case.

Former Oracle worker, Rebecca Richardson, is suing Oracle for sexual discrimination and one of the vendor’s employee, Randol Tucker, for sexual harassment.

Richardson claims she was unfairly demoted after she flagged Tucker’s inappropriate behaviour to the company. She is seeking $450,000 in damages.

In a directions hearing, Oracle defense lawyer, Elizabeth Raper, highlighted to the Court that the case concerns what transpired between two employees as a sexual harassment matter and alleged repudiation and demotion by the company.

Raper said she had understood that oral evidence was only required to address crucial conversations between Richardson and Tucker while the rest of the evidence can be submitted in written form to the Court.

Presiding Judge, Justice Buchanan, corrected this assumption

“I can’t at the moment see any reason that evidence should not be done orally and also without notice to me,” he said. “I can’t see why people shouldn’t get into the witness box and say what happened as opposed to discussing their version of events in private in a solicitor’s office.

“I’d like to hear it directly.”

Justice Buchanan said he wouldn't budge from this position unless it was highly inconvenient for the parties concerned.

The hearing had begun on an unusual note with Justice Buchanan revealing that the Court had yet to receive a record of defense from the defendants. The matter is suspected to be an administrative error from either the defendants’ side or from the Federal Court offices.

The plaintiff and defense lawyers have been squabbling over what evidence can be requested on discovery. The dispute is partially attributed to the defence claiming certain documents requested were irrelevant to the case.

“This is an unpromising start in litigation to get bogged down in interlocutory skirmishes,” Justice Buchanan said.

Both parties have committed to resolving the issue swiftly.

A hearing to address the issue of the discovery of evidence is set for November 19.

Follow Us

Join the newsletter!


Sign up to gain exclusive access to email subscriptions, event invitations, competitions, giveaways, and much more.

Membership is free, and your security and privacy remain protected. View our privacy policy before signing up.

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags Oraclesexual discriminationlegal proceedings


Show Comments