GCLM 9672 of 2012 JOANNA SOUCEK. and LUKE DONALD WALLADGE AT PERTH ON FRIDAY, 25 JANUARY 2013, AT AM

Transcription

1 Copyright in this document is reserved to the State of Western Australia. Reproduction of this document (or part thereof, in any format) except with the prior written consent of the attorney-general is prohibited. Please note that under section 43 of the Copyright Act 1968 copyright is not infringed by anything reproduced for the purposes of a judicial proceeding or of a report of a judicial proceeding. THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA CIVIL GCLM 9672 of 2012 JOANNA SOUCEK and LUKE DONALD WALLADGE BEFORE: REGISTRAR SOUTHWELL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS AT PERTH ON FRIDAY, 25 JANUARY 2013, AT AM 25/1/13 1 (s&c)

2 MCWA71/2/awp SOLOMON, MR: Good morning, registrar; Solomon for the judgment creditor. HIS HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Solomon. SOLOMON, MR: I believe Mr Walladge is here following the bench arrest warrant from late last year, registrar. HIS HONOUR: Are you seeking to examine today, Mr Solomon? SOLOMON, MR: Yes, exactly right, registrar. HIS HONOUR: Are you Luke Walladge? WALLADGE, MR: I am indeed. HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Will you stand up, please? WALLADGE, LUKE DONALD sworn: SOLOMON, MR: Thank you. Your full name, please? ---Luke Donald Walladge. Your current address, please?---i am in the process of moving, so would you like my immediately previous or my about-to-be address? I think "about-to-be"?---okay. In that case it will be 3 Wrexham Street, in Melbourne. Could you just spell that for me, please, Mr Walladge? ---W-r-e-x-h-a-m, as in the English county, Wrexham. Wrexham. In Melbourne?---Correct. HIS HONOUR: Is there a suburb of Melbourne?---Windsor, as in "House of", just to maintain the British flavour. Mr Walladge, you've completed this statement of financial affairs?---correct. Is this statement true and correct?---yes. Thank you. Mr Solomon is going to ask you some questions about that, if you would not mind answering those questions. SOLOMON, MR: Thank you, registrar?---i will do my best. Thank you, Mr Walladge, for showing up. Could I also grab where you are living right now as well? I have the Wrexham Street where you are going to. Where are you now?---i am in the process of leaving 2/32 Carr Street, West Perth, /1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 2

3 MCWA71/3/awp Who owns Carr Street?---That would be my - well, I cannot actually call her as my ex-wife as we are in the process of separating, but that would be her property, under her name. This is your spouse's property?---well. You are still legally married, though? You have not divorced?---no, we are in the process of separating. All right. You are separated but still married. What is her name, by the way?---well, I'm not entirely sure that's relevant, but it's Lindsay Sarah Warby. Warby?---Mm'hm. What does Lindsay do?---she is a lawyer. Working with?---is all of this quite relevant, sir? The reason that I ask is because I have no wish to cause embarrassment to my ex-wife because of these proceedings. No, clearly not. It goes to showing whether you have means. If you are married to a woman who was a lawyer and who was gainfully employed as such, there may well be access to means?---well, I'm afraid that you will find that as we are separated, it's not relevant so I'm happy to give her particulars, and I believe in fact I just ask for where she's employed and whether you know how much she earns?---well, Mr Solomon, I'm afraid to state that the client on whom you - the client on whose behalf you appear actually knows where my wife works, because she has been in the habit of delivering letters to her as a nuisance. HIS HONOUR: Mr Walladge, can you just answer the question, please?---she works at the State Solicitor's Office. SOLOMON, MR: Do you know how much she earns?---i actually do not. Money is not the subject that we discussed. Do you have an idea how much she earns?---i imagine it is - I imagine she is not poor. And for what degree might she be "not poor"?---difficult as it may be for some people to accept, we actually didn't discuss our financial affairs. It was one of the issues that led to our separation, as a matter of fact. There's no need to be evasive, Mr Walladge?---I'm not being evasive, sir. Do you have any idea what she earns or not?---i would not like to give you a figure that could well be incorrect. I imagine it is /1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 3

4 MCWA71/4/awp I am happy - - -?---I imagine it has I am happy to take a conservative and modest figure?---i imagine is it six figures. I would be surprised if it were less. Beyond that I couldn't say. Is she a senior practitioner?---i don't know. That's a question I couldn t answer. How many years out from law school, is the question, I suppose?---she's 36 years old. You can draw a deduction from that. Was she a mature-age student? What I am trying to get at is what degree of seniority she has within her profession, not necessarily her chronological superiority?---i am not a lawyer so I couldn't possibly attest to that. Okay. So you have no idea how much she earns but you assume it might be in the six figures?---i - as I said, that would be my assumption, yes. Right, and that house at Carr Street is owned by her? ---Always has been. Have you ever contributed to it?---no. You've never helped pay any of the mortgage?---no. Is there a mortgage?---there is a mortgage. I have not ever held title So you're aware of some degree of financial activity; you're aware there is a mortgage, but you aren't aware how much your wife earns?---correct. Do you know how much the mortgage is?---again, it's a difficult question to answer because I'm aware that my wife shares title with her parents over the property, so I couldn't actually tell you how much is whose and then what remains of the mortgage. I know there is a mortgage, I know there's some money owing. What do you reckon the property might be worth?---i'm not a valuer, sir, it's a No, likewise, but, you know, Perth people - we're all obsessed with property prices?---i'm not. We tend to have an idea how much things are worth?---i can tell you it's a three-bedroom, three-bathroom, two-storey townhouse in Carr Street, in West Perth. Okay?---I have not bought property; I have not sold property; I have absolutely no idea what it would go for. 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 4

5 MCWA71/5/awp You don't contribute to it?---i have never. You don't contribute to any of the rates, taxes, maintenance, upkeep, water rates, (indistinct/one word)? ---I would have contributed to bills across the time of our marriage, certainly. How would you have gone about contributing those? Do you have an idea what sort of money might be involved there? ---Usually would have given my wife either cash-in-hand or made bank transfers as required or just paid the bill myself. So you have made contributions to that property? I mean, obviously that is something you'll need to deal with as part of your impending divorce if you go through property settlement proceeds in the Family Court?---Certainly. I don't wish you to prejudice your position there. What I'm trying to get at, and what I think you know, this whole process is about today, is trying to establish whether you have means to pay the judgment creditor's debt?---mm'hm. Fifteen-odd thousand dollars or thereabouts. In fact from memory, it was $15,127, but then we came to an agreement prior to this means inquiry was first filed, where you agreed to pay the whole lot within 28 days. Do you recall that?---i recall that there were correspondence relating to that. I have correspondence here. Would you like me to read it? ---No, I you can read it if you like. What it says is that you agree to pay the full amount? ---Uh'huh. Within 28 days, provided we didn't serve the means inquiry on you?---huh? But you didn't pay the full amount?---no. On the 28th day you paid exactly 10 per cent of it?---yes, and in fact, if you - again, if you have the correspondence there, what the correspondence will clearly show is that I informed your client through your firm, through yourself, that while I had initially made the arrangement in the belief that I could pay the amount, that circumstances beyond my control had intervened. That I was thereby making a good faith payment and while I was acknowledging that I was in breach of the agreement, that I invited your client through yourself to make alternate arrangements or to contact me. I received no confirmation (indistinct)?---no, no, sorry, I'm still talking, sir /1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 5

6 MCWA71/6/awp Where that $1500 came from to make the 10 per cent? ---That would have come from my wages at the time. What were you earning those wages from?---my employment. What is your employment?---my employment at the time or my employment currently? Both would suffice, please?---your employment at the time - this is not long ago, this was November, no, sorry - - -? ---No. September - - -?---No. You'll Yes, September?---Indeed. In fact, the correspondence is right there if you would like to confirm. I thought you didn't recall the correspondence? ---No, I said I recall the correspondence very well. Good. September What were you earning? How were you earning it? Who was your employer?---i was working part-time, three days a week, in the office of Andrew Waddell, Member for Forrestfield. The pro rata salary was about $90,000 a year and you can pro rata that down to a 0.6. What did you do for Mr Waddell?---Is that relevant to this matter? What it goes to is your skills, your prospects for future employment, your - the type of employment that you have and whether your comment that you earn $90,000 pro-rata is how much - commensurate with your station?---well certainly commensurate with my station and skills, because not only was I employed on that, I was employed on that through the scale of Parliamentary Officers and Assistants which calls on the individual Member of Parliament to justify the salaries which they pay to their staff, so clearly it was commensurate. Okay. $90, ?---Self-evidently. Pro rata. Three days. Did you get any other perks with that? Was there a car - - -?---No. For example?---there's not. Any travel?---no. He's only a state member of parliament. But did you travel much during the period September 2012 to now?---well, that's a question that doesn't necessarily follow from your previous ones. 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 6

7 MCWA71/7/awp No. It doesn't?---i travelled to Melbourne. I left the office of Andrew Waddell in, I would say, the first week in October. I moved - well, I didn't move at the time - I was based in Melbourne for three months. There would have been some travel backwards and forwards for that. What were you doing in Melbourne?---I was working on a campaign. For?---It was a union campaign. Which union might that be?---the Health Services Union, Victoria Number 1 Branch. Were you being paid for that?---i - I was operating under an agreement with the, the candidate, where I would invoice the candidate - the campaign. You'll see on my statement of financial affairs that there are a number of - well, there's a reasonable sum of money outstanding, owed to me. The number that is listed there relates to unpaid and outstanding invoices. That's $12,000, is it?---$12,800, yes. $12,800. That's owed to you by whom? HSU?---No, that's not owed to me by the union, that would be improper. Who owes you the $12,800?---The difficult part of answering that question is - I'm not sure how familiar you are with these sorts of campaigns - the campaign exists No, I'm not a political animal, Mr Walladge?---No, sir. I'm unfamiliar?---right, well, then, allow me to fill in your knowledge. I'm just asking who owes you the money?---the money - well, there is no legal entity that owes me the money, other than, I suppose it would be down to the candidate. Now how the candidate sources the funds to pay for that Who is the candidate?---the candidate was the successful candidate, as it so happens, was Diana Asmar, A-s-m-a-r. Yes, I've seen her name before?---mm'hm. She owes you $12,800?---Her campaign does. If I was to contact them to ask them whether they would be prepared to pay that to us, would they? What do you think? In part satisfaction of your debt?---i don t know. That would be a question - that would be a matter for them. So you have no - - -?---I couldn't possibly /1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 7

8 MCWA71/8/awp (indistinct)?---i couldn't possibly answer on behalf of another person. What about on behalf of yourself? Would you be comfortable doing that?---what I would be comfortable with having happen is having my invoices - outstanding invoices be paid, because the original - one of the many reasons - there were several reasons - but one of the reasons I actually took the job was to settle this and to other outstanding debts. Registrar, I will just flag; I will continue a little more, but I just flag that that might be appropriate for a debtappropriation order against that?---quite happy for that to exist. Well, this is all about finding out what your means are, and we've established there might be some means there we could tap into, which would be great. Are you employed at the moment, or unemployed?---as I sit here at this moment, I am unemployed, which is to say that I had casual and temporary employment which ceased at the - on the 21st of this month and I am in negotiations to commence full-time employment. Up to the 21st of this month, then, who was employing you? ---I was on a temporary contract with the Health Services Union, Victoria Number 1 Branch. That's different to the campaign?---that's a very different entity indeed. All right. So they employed you. How did they pay you, and what did they pay you?---i was paid on a salary which was equal to $100,000 a year, per annum. You'll see again in my statement of financial affairs that that worked out to be a net of $1,415 a week. It was paid weekly. So there two weekly instalments thereof and - but as you can see, I'm in Perth, not in Melbourne and therefore not working there this week. There isn't any longstanding contractual arrangement and no doubt the union will go through a very proper process to determine what employees it needs moving forward. I intend to be part of that process Are you currently employed by the HSU at $100,000 a year- - -?---No. When you were, from what period up until the 21st?---It was from the 7th until the 21st. It was effectively two weeks. Prior to that? Just with the campaign, was it? ---That's correct. 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 8

9 MCWA71/9/awp When did the campaign end?---the poll was declared on 23 December The business of the campaign actually concluded on 21 December When the count began with the Australian Electoral Commission. As at right now, you're unemployed, but you weren't on the 21st?---Correct. In fact, you were earning a hundred grand a year. Why did you not pay anything toward the reduction of the judgment debt whilst you were earning either $90,000 a year for a goodly period or $100,000 a year? There's been no payment, no reduction of the judgment debt since that one-off payment of 10 per cent in September. It's a four month period where there has been nothing?---well, I'm very pleased to hear that you're not a political animal, but you're obviously very well-versed in sophistry. Because, as I clearly explained to court, I was not on $100,000 a year, I was employed for two weeks on a temporary casual contract, the sum total of which was $2800 or $ But you were earning - - -?---So therefore (indistinct)?---no, sir, you've asked the question and I'm answering it. Therefore, to represent that as if I was on $100,000 a year or was on $90,000 - which it wasn't, because it was prorated down to about 60, right, which ceased not long after this matter. You want to talk to me about why I haven't made moves to reduce a debt when indeed I informed your client, through you, that I wasn't able to pay the judgment as originally intended, that I made a good faith payment of 10 per cent - which was never acknowledged by you or you client - there was no contact from you or your client to set out an alternate payment method Mr Walladge - - -?---Why then Please - - -?---Why then, without further ado, why then would I necessarily contribute scarce and meagre resources without a strong and solid agreement in place? I might offer a reason, that it is a debt of the court. This isn't up to you to determine whether you pay it or don't pay it?---i didn't indicate that it was. This is a debt of the court. You have decided not to pay it?---no, you're quite incorrect. You have made a voluntary decision - - -? ---Quite incorrect, sir. Not to pay it?---quite incorrect. 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 9

10 MCWA71/10/awp And I believe you have substantial means to do so? ---Well, that's very nice. My father also believe in God, it doesn't necessarily make him right, and if you want to misrepresent the situation further, you go ahead. HIS HONOUR: Can we move forward and try to resolve this matter, please. SOLOMON, MR: Do you have any dependants, Mr Walladge? ---No. What I have here is a statement of your assets - - -? ---Correct. And liabilities. You're paying $150 a week rent?---yes. Where might that be?---that's at 3 Wrexham Street. Right. You are moving to Melbourne?---Yes. As I said. And you have no intention of trying to pay this debt prior to you leaving for Melbourne?---Well, again, I'm here today. Let's sort this out. Now, it's my full intention to pay the debt. As and when I am able. It's my full intention, whether that be to enter into - entering into a payment agreement or, should I walk outside now and find that my invoices have been paid, I am happy to repay debts. Were you to offer to make a payment on an instalment arrangement, would you have a figure in mind?---well, obviously that's something that we could discuss. I would certainly have a figure in mind, but What might that be? What do you think you can manage to pay?---well, keeping in mind that I've already had the unfortunate experience of having to breach one payment agreement and I wouldn't want to be in the position of having to do so again, I would say a figure of somewhere around $250 to $300 a week might be appropriate. Do you think you can accommodate that without putting you into a position whereby you breach that?---well, that's a question that I would have to finalise once the terms of my potential employment are finalised. I'm just asking now; I mean, if you think you can accommodate $250 or $300 a week, that's certainly encouraging. Where would that come from?---that would come from my wages. Your new employment?---should it materialise. Who is that with?---well, I am - as I explained to you earlier - going through the process of applying for employment with the HSU Victoria Number 1 Branch. 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 10

11 MCWA71/11/awp You don't have secured employment yet?---no, and I explained that to you earlier. HIS HONOUR: Is this income - I see, is up until - was up until a few days ago? The $1415?---Yes. The union very properly wishes to go through a formal selection procedure for its - for putting people onto longer term contracts. But of course it needs staff to operate in the interim. For the purposes of today, whilst your expenses are as at today, your income assets today, then, is nil?---yes. Now, I regard myself as reasonable skilled and quite employable and I would be very surprised if in the next, shall we say, two weeks, that employment didn't materialise. $1415 in terms of anticipating your employment. Do you anticipate receiving that income?---well, again, sir, I couldn't It is based on a past figure?---again, sir, I couldn't answer that question on behalf of the leadership and the management of the union; that will be a matter for them My question is: do you expect to get it?---i would expect that any employment, either with them or elsewhere would be in the same ballpark as that figure, yes. SOLOMON, MR: Mr Walladge, on your statement here, I see that you have said you have no assets in terms of personal property?---well. At all. No car, no TV?---Mm'hm. That's both correct. No house; we've established that. I assume that you are renting the Wrexham property?---yes, I am. Well, it's a private arrangement. I'm staying with a personal friend and contributing to his rental costs as agreed between the two of us. HIS HONOUR: Is that board, in effect, is it?--- Essentially. If you want to characterise it that way. Let's pick up on that to - on the expenditure, you've got other payments $500. I may have missed whether you've been asked that question or whether you are getting there. SOLOMON, MR: No. The time is fine now to put that. This $500 lump sum there for "other payments". Who are they to and what are they for?---they, well, other payments is a fairly vague, nebulous concept. Mm'hm?---But included under that are sort of every-day expenses that you may have. Some of them, I mean, that is 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 11

12 MCWA71/12/awp far from an exhaustive list that you've got there. The fact of the matter is that I also, you know, I had to - I borrowed some money off a friend - I think it was about $300. I paid him back et cetera, et cetera. As at In preference to our client, who had a judgment debt? ---I am perfectly willing, as I said HIS HONOUR: So far, just going through - I am trying to bring the thing back to basics: rent or board $150, food $200, telephone $125, clothing, vehicle expenses $50? ---Mm'hm? What is the vehicle?---the vehicle was, and again, this is This is at today, of course. Is that $50?---When I say "as at", right, what I've done there Just tell me what the $50 is for. Do not tell me all the other stories; I need to bring this to an end, so you are dragging on. I have let you explore all sorts of things and a bit of sparring going on, but what are the vehicle expenses for?---petrol. Do you have a vehicle?---no, that was a union vehicle. That is in the past, is it?---yes. That can come off. Bus, train, taxi fares $40?---Yes. Is that anticipated?---no, that's an actual breakdown of what that final - okay, what I did, to fill out the form here, is I took my last wage, or my last week's wages that I got from the HSU and I broke down what got spent. So far there is not much in that $500 you have accounted for, other than to cover "other", normal expenses, but you have figures in there for all expenses?---yes. The same as you have a personal - or another debt $5000? ---Which I imagine is about to be dealt with by this court as well. There is another matter?---well, you'll see Before us today?---you should have before you there, sir, two statements of financial affairs SOLOMON, MR: (indistinct) I'm representing the creditor. HIS HONOUR: Another one to come. SOLOMON, MR: Another one to come?---yes. 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 12

13 MCWA71/13/awp HIS HONOUR: And outstanding fines. They are on a time to pay order, are they?---yes. How much are you paying off those?---well, again, some of this stuff comes under - I've agreed to pay $150 a week. There is $150 a week on fines?---mm'hm. That is out of the $500, is it?---yes. I didn't know whether to put that under "other court orders." We are a court, so we would like to know that people are paying their fines, so we usually put that aside separately?---mm'hm. Certainly. My joke. That leaves $350 out of the "other payments"? ---As I explained, there was What have you not covered?---rent, food, telephone, clothing, vehicle expenses, train - unexpected, is it? ---Well, as I explained, I was in a position where I had to borrow some money off someone two weeks before. It came to be paid, I had to pay them back. That is $300, you said?---yes. That is a paid debt?---yes. Well, that is not there. It is not included as a debt, a liability. That is not part of it, so the other $350 is for "unexpected" things, is it?---i've told you That could go towards the amount that - - -?---I told you how I've arrived at that figure. I do not know that you have. I am saying, "what haven't you covered?" All you started saying was "other bills". "Other things" - but you have things listed. What are the "other things"?---well, I've just explained to you, sir, how I arrived at that figure. Forgive me if I misheard you, but I do not think I heard an explanation that - - -No, what I said is, that I took - I wrote down the final week's worth of salary that I got from the HSU. And then I broke down what that went on. Your situation in Melbourne will be different to what it was here?---i am in the unfortunate position, sir, of my situation last week not being the same situation this week and won't be the same situation next week. And I am endeavouring to answer the questions and go through the process in a reasonable and transparent manner. I understand you are in - it seems to me you are in a transition period right now?---yes. Because there are 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 13

14 MCWA71/14/awp other things that I haven't listed there, such as plane tickets, relocation costs and all the rest of it. Mr Solomon, as I heard it, we have an offer of somewhere between $250 and $300 a week. SOLOMON, MR: That accords with my understanding, too, Registrar. HIS HONOUR: Yes. What do you say about that? SOLOMON, MR: I would rather get an instalment order for something than nothing. Whilst I believe that is certainly on the low side of things, I would submit that $300 on these figures is certainly doable. HIS HONOUR: Is $300 your offer?---well. The only reason why I Yes or no (indistinct)?---well, no. The reason I said $250 to $300 is there's another matter about to come before the court; I've got to deal with both of them and I would like to leave myself in a position to be able to deal with both of them, so I would say $250. Believe me when I tell you, sir, I would like this matter to be concluded as soon as possible. $250 a week. SOLOMON, MR: Registrar, we will accept the $250. May we also reactivate just that question about the potential appropriation order against that $12,800 that seems to be outstanding? HIS HONOUR: Yes. I can make a determination. I will make a determination that there is an available date that might be appropriated to satisfy the judgment debt. Seeking costs for today, Mr Solomon? SOLOMON, MR: Yes, thank you, Registrar. HIS HONOUR: As a SOLOMON, MR: A senior practitioner. HIS HONOUR: Determined by the court, having regard to the income, expenses, assets and liabilities of the judgment debtor that the judgment debtor has the means to pay the judgment debt by an instalment order. It is also determined by the court, as I said, that there is an available debt that may be appropriated to satisfy the judgment debt. The instalment order I make is that the judgment debtor is ordered to pay the judgment debt which now stands at $14, which includes interest of $ /1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 14

15 MCWA71/15/awp up until today; the cost of Mr Solomon appearing today, $180, by instalments of $250 per week, the first instalment to be paid on - - -?---Now, this is a difficult question because as I've explained, I m in a transition period. Again, I wouldn't like to start - put it this way, I wouldn't like to say next week. Two weeks?---i don't start working - well, what's the date today, sir? I's the 25th? Yes?---Two weeks' time would be February?---8 February. If you make it 15 February there will be absolutely no question as to the money. 15 February Thank you. SOLOMON, MR: Thank you, registrar?---i might as well just stay here, sir. (THE WITNESS WITHDREW) AT 10;55 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED ACCORDINGLY 25/1/13 WALLADGE, L.D. XN 15

16 Transcript Statement Australasia Pty Limited is contracted by the Department of the Attorney-General to record and/or transcribe court and tribunal proceedings in Western Australia as specified under a government contract. This contract prescribes the recording and transcription production standards that must be adhered to. The transcript heard on 25/1/13: 1. Is a written reproduction of the audio record of the proceedings; 2. Is a complete transcript except where otherwise stated. Any "indistinct" notations within the transcript refer to those parts of the recording that could not be accurately transcribed due to speech clarity, recording quality or other factors impacting word intelligibility. Certified on 19/2/13 25/1/13 16