WRC entitled to dismiss Ammi Burke's case due to obstructive conduct, court told

Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger asked Ms Burke not to repeat submissions she already made, as it is a “waste of court time and, as you pointed out yesterday… it is not in the interests of the taxpayer”.

Ammi Burke (pictured) submitted to the High Court on Thursday that it was “not at all unreasonable” for her and her mother to repeatedly request the officer to conduct the hearing lawfully, and “reasonable” for them to maintain that Arthur Cox should be required to disclose the emails. Photo: Collins Courts

The High Court cannot give “credence” to the claim it is legitimate for a litigant to disrupt proceedings if she is dissatisfied with a ruling, counsel for the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has submitted.

It is “startling”, said Catherine Donnelly SC, that Ammi Burke argued it was reasonable for her and her mother, Martina, to repeatedly ask WRC adjudication officer Kevin Baneham to reverse his refusal to summon two witnesses and to order law firm Arthur Cox to disclose certain emails Ms Burke wanted.