ID :
44152
Wed, 02/04/2009 - 20:19
Auther :
Shortlink :
http://m.oananews.org//node/44152
The shortlink copeid
Watchdog kept Pratt documents: lawyers
Lawyers for Richard Pratt have accused the consumer watchdog of withholding
documents that could assist the cardboard king defend criminal charges.
Pratt's lawyer Robert Richter, QC, told the Federal Court the Australian Competition
and Consumer Commission (ACCC) had been too slow in their obligation to disclose the
documents, which were notes taken at a 2007 meeting.
It is alleged that at the meeting, senior ACCC members spoke with chairman Graeme
Samuel about the possibility of charging Pratt.
Lawyers for the billionaire businessman requested the documents under Freedom of
Information last December.
Mr Richter told the court on Wednesday notes of the meeting taken by ACCC general
counsel Bob Alexander and lead investigator Geoff Williams were handed over in
January.
He said when the men gave evidence in court in December they denied making the notes.
Mr Richter said he was not sure if the ACCC had been "muddling" or been "deceptive".
"At this stage we simply register our motion of grave concern about the manner in
which the documents are produced to us," Mr Richter said.
Prosecutor Mark Dean SC said the notes did not alter the evidence about the 2007
meeting.
Pratt is accused of misleading the ACCC at a hearing in 2005 when he denied a
conversation he allegedly had about price fixing with Amcor chief executive Russell
Jones at a hotel in Melbourne in 2001.
During a civil case in 2007 Pratt signed an agreed statement of facts which said he
admitted misleading the commission.
Closing submissions are taking place in a pre-trial hearing which will determine if
the agreed statement of facts is admissible at trial.
Mr Dean said Pratt had broken the law and deserved to be prosecuted.
"Nobody is above the law," he said.
"Despite his standing and prominence, the ACCC, in circumstances where they thought
he had given false and misleading evidence, it was entirely appropriate for them to
raise the matter with the DPP, which is exactly what they did."
Mr Dean said Pratt was a "well resourced litigant" who could easily have contested
the civil case if he had wished.
He said Pratt made the admissions in the civil case by his own free will.
"This is not a situation of a police officer interrogating a suspect in a police
station," Mr Dean said.
The pre-trial hearing before Justice Donnell Ryan continues on Thursday.
documents that could assist the cardboard king defend criminal charges.
Pratt's lawyer Robert Richter, QC, told the Federal Court the Australian Competition
and Consumer Commission (ACCC) had been too slow in their obligation to disclose the
documents, which were notes taken at a 2007 meeting.
It is alleged that at the meeting, senior ACCC members spoke with chairman Graeme
Samuel about the possibility of charging Pratt.
Lawyers for the billionaire businessman requested the documents under Freedom of
Information last December.
Mr Richter told the court on Wednesday notes of the meeting taken by ACCC general
counsel Bob Alexander and lead investigator Geoff Williams were handed over in
January.
He said when the men gave evidence in court in December they denied making the notes.
Mr Richter said he was not sure if the ACCC had been "muddling" or been "deceptive".
"At this stage we simply register our motion of grave concern about the manner in
which the documents are produced to us," Mr Richter said.
Prosecutor Mark Dean SC said the notes did not alter the evidence about the 2007
meeting.
Pratt is accused of misleading the ACCC at a hearing in 2005 when he denied a
conversation he allegedly had about price fixing with Amcor chief executive Russell
Jones at a hotel in Melbourne in 2001.
During a civil case in 2007 Pratt signed an agreed statement of facts which said he
admitted misleading the commission.
Closing submissions are taking place in a pre-trial hearing which will determine if
the agreed statement of facts is admissible at trial.
Mr Dean said Pratt had broken the law and deserved to be prosecuted.
"Nobody is above the law," he said.
"Despite his standing and prominence, the ACCC, in circumstances where they thought
he had given false and misleading evidence, it was entirely appropriate for them to
raise the matter with the DPP, which is exactly what they did."
Mr Dean said Pratt was a "well resourced litigant" who could easily have contested
the civil case if he had wished.
He said Pratt made the admissions in the civil case by his own free will.
"This is not a situation of a police officer interrogating a suspect in a police
station," Mr Dean said.
The pre-trial hearing before Justice Donnell Ryan continues on Thursday.
