Alan Eldridge's unfair dismissal lawsuit returns to Supreme Court for day two

Mayor Greg Conkey took to the witness stand for a second day, where he was questioned over claims made in his affidavit.

"It was around late 2016 that I developed concerns about Alan's integrity," Cr Conkey wrote in May 2020.

"I ultimately formed a view for a number of reasons ... that Alan was not able to provide me, as the mayor, the confidence and trust that a general manager should."

Senior Counsel for Mr Eldridge, John Fernon, cross-examined Cr Conkey on the allegations that he had set out in this statement.

One of them was regarding Cr Conkey's statement that "Alan would consistently spend money on coffees" using his council credit card when meeting developers.

IN OTHER NEWS

Mr Fernon asked him if it was the desirable outcome for the GM to pay rather than the developers. "That might be an unfavourable outcome ... that might suggest the GM is getting favours from the developer ... so Mr Eldridge's conduct in spending money on the coffee was indeed the desirable course," he asked.

"Yes," Cr Conkey replied.

The mayor was also questioned about the documents supplied by Mr Eldridge's solicitors in response to the allegations raised. In April 2017, Cr Conkey sent a letter - prepared by the council's legal team and signed by himself - to Mr Eldridge.

In May 2017, 10 days before the extraordinary meeting in which the general manager was sacked, Mr Eldridge's solicitors provided a statement responding to each of the allegations.

When questioned by Mr Fernon, Cr Conkey said he did not believe a written copy of the response was supplied to his fellow councillors.

Supreme Court Justice Andrew Bell asked the mayor why he did not wish to allow his fellow councillors to see Mr Eldridge's response.

Cr Conkey explained that during the extraordinary meeting, the council's lawyer presented all the information to councillors and responded to questions.

"But there was a response on May 19, 2017, from [Mr Eldridge's solicitors] ... I understand your evidence to be that you decided not to provide that written response to the other councillors," Justice Bell said.

"I understand that all that information was supplied to the councillors on the night of [the meeting on] May 29," Conkey responded.

Mr Fernon put to Cr Conkey that he did not share the documents with his fellow councillors because he wanted the "desired outcome", which was for Mr Eldridge to be sacked. Cr Conkey said he disagreed.

The council's defence team re-examined the mayor, during which new documents were tendered.

Senior counsel Robert Goot asked Cr Conkey to review emails which demonstrated councillors had the opportunity to review the documents. Cr Conkey said he recalled the email chain after being prompted with the evidence.

The hearing continues.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: