C2006/3989, Transcript of Proceedings [2006] AIRCTrans 1324 (27 December 2006)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

---

Workplace Relations Act 1996 16270-1

COMMISSIONER LARKIN

C2006/3989

AUSTRALIAN RAIL TRACK CORPORATION
AND
AUSTRALIAN RAIL, TRAM AND BUS INDUSTRY UNION
s.496(1) - Appl’n for order against industrial action (federal system).
(C2006/3989)

SYDNEY

FRIDAY, 08 DECEMBER 2006

PN1

MS J MCAULIFFE: I appear on behalf of the Australian Rail Track Corporation, with me Mr A Doyle, from Australian Rail and Track Corporation.

PN2

MR A HOWELL: I appear on behalf of the RTW, the respondent to the application, with me Mr P Kessey.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Ms McAuliffe?

PN4

MS MCAULIFFE: If the Commission pleases, I appear for the Australian Rail Track Corporation. I appear in this matter on behalf of the employer, RIC, but also indicated in the application, also for ARTC in its own right as the party affected by the industrial action.

PN5

THE COMMISSIONER: Just a moment, Ms McAuliffe. The application was lodged by Australian Rail Track Corporation, not by RIC.

PN6

MS MCAULIFFE: That's correct, your Honour. Can I just - - -

PN7

THE COMMISSIONER: No. It's just that the submission said "and RIC" as outlined in the application. I can't see that there's a RIC application involved. I just wanted to clarify.

PN8

MS MCAULIFFE: The employees are seconded to us by - yes.

PN9

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN10

MS MCAULIFFE: By Rail Infrastructure Corporation. We have, via means of a labour services agreement, so they are designated the employer and we are here acting on behalf of the employee.

PN11

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, but RIC didn't make the application.

PN12

MS MCAULIFFE: That's correct.

PN13

THE COMMISSIONER: That's what I wanted clarity on. Yes, please, when you're ready.

PN14

MS MCAULIFFE: Commissioner, on Monday, 4 December 2006 RTC received a notice from the RTBU Newcastle Signallers' sub-branch advising of certain demands on ARTC and if those demands were not met, the sub-branch members would be exempt as described in the notice of the obligation to perform overtime and from the obligation to swap area controller boards as directed by ARTC. The RTBU Signallers' Branch is made up of RIC employees seconded to ARTC as area controllers and signallers. Those secondment arrangements by the background are formalised by an agreement between ARTC, the Rail Infrastructure Corporation and the State Rail Authority of New South Wales known as the Labour Services Agreement.

PN15

The area control is seconded to ARTC. The secondment is expected to end on June 30, 2007. That advice from the sub branch, Commissioner, was provided in written form by Mr David Ling, who we understand holds the honorary position of Secretary of the Union sub branch and is also an area controller at ARTC Broadmeadow Train Control Centre. If I may tender a copy of that advice.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Howell, you have a copy of that notice?

PN17

MR HOWELL: Yes, thank you, Commissioner, I do.

EXHIBIT #ARTC1 NOTICE FROM RTBU

PN18

MS MCAULIFFE: On the afternoon of Tuesday, 5 December, three of the rostered afternoon shift area controllers - - -

PN19

THE COMMISSIONER: Say that again, Ms McAuliffe?

PN20

MS MCAULIFFE: On the afternoon of Tuesday, 5 December three of the rostered afternoon shift area controllers and one signaller failed to report for their shifts apparently due to sickness.

PN21

MR HOWELL: Commissioner, I'm loathe to do this, but I'm going to have to object to material coming to the Commission in this way as assertions from the bar table. These applications are not simple industrial dispute type applications of the kind the Commission would regularly deal with under a certified agreement. These are an application for orders. The orders carry very serious consequences. Before the Commission can make these formal orders, the Commission must be satisfied of certain jurisdictional facts. In our respectful submission that has to be on the basis of appropriate evidence in admissible form. It ought not, in our respectful submission, come by way of assertions from the bar table.

PN22

If someone is to give evidence of attempts to make phone calls, if someone is to give evidence of what conversations they had, then so be it, we'll deal with it when the matter arises.

PN23

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Howell, sorry to interrupt you. What you're saying is that the RTBU dispute submissions that's been put to me and what you're saying is that for me to be satisfied, then I would require the appropriate evidence to substantiate the submissions from the bar table.

PN24

MR HOWELL: Yes, Commissioner.

PN25

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Howell.

PN26

MS MCAULIFFE: If I could start again.

PN27

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, can I just step back Ms McAuliffe. On 5 December you say there was three rostered shifts and what happened?

PN28

MS MCAULIFFE: Three of the rostered afternoon shift area controllers, so three people - - -

PN29

THE COMMISSIONER: So three area controllers?

PN30

MS MCAULIFFE: And one signaller failed to report for their shifts apparently due to sickness.

PN31

THE COMMISSIONER: So they rang in sick?

PN32

MS MCAULIFFE: That's correct.

PN33

THE COMMISSIONER: And that's a normal shift, not an - - -

PN34

MS MCAULIFFE: A normal shift.

PN35

THE COMMISSIONER: Not an overtime shift?

PN36

MS MCAULIFFE: That's correct. This meant that ARTC was unable to cover the shifts on coast A, coast B and the suburban boards. As occurs in these not unusual circumstances where a shift is to be covered by overtime to fill absences, ARTC requested firstly that the area controllers on the day shift perform overtime at the conclusion of their normal shifts to cover the first of the afternoon shifts, which would have meant four hours. On our understanding that the area controllers rostered to work the night shift would be required to attend and cover the second half of the afternoon shifts, once again four hours, on an overtime basis prior to commencement of their normal shift.

PN37

All of the three area controllers in attendance at the Broadmeadow Train Control Centre who were approached by ARTC management refused to perform the overtime. ARTC management then contacted seven area controllers not on duty and requested that they attend to perform the vacant shifts. All of the area controllers approached also refused to perform the overtime shifts. After the refusal by the area controllers to work the overtime to cover the three shifts ARTC utilised its own direct employees, known as network controllers, to fill the absences on coast A, B and suburban boards.

PN38

ARTC had to alter seven different network control shifts to provide coverage for the three area control shifts. Although ARTC network controllers will progressively replace the work seconded train controllers, area controllers and signallers over the next seven months, this measure on Tuesday was a stop gap measure mainly as network controllers had their own roster or training obligations and it's not intended as relief arrangements for secondees' absences.

PN39

Yesterday, Thursday, 7 December at a meeting held between ARTC and the RTBU with Mr Kessey and myself present, the RTBUs notice of industrial action was discussed and ARTC requested that the union withdraw this advice and to perform work as usual without bans, limitations or restrictions. At the conclusion of this meeting Mr Kessey from the RTBU advised the RIC, the ARTC representatives, myself and Mr Banks that he would discuss the notice with his members and advise us of the outcome. At approximately 4.30 Mr Kessey contacted Mr Banks by phone and advised that the notice would not be withdrawn.

PN40

It is our submission, Commissioner, that the union's actions, as communicated through the sub branch of the notice and confirmed by Mr Kessey constitutes industrial action. This action has the potential for serious consequences as when similar circumstances to which occurred on Tuesday inevitably arise again, the area controllers and the signallers refused to cover absences on overtime or refuse to perform on an alternative board, both of which occurs customarily, an area controllers board may be left entirely uncovered which will result in the stopping the movement of any trains within the rail network section covered by the area controller boards.

PN41

Unfortunately, Commissioner, this is not the first time that these matters have been put before the Commission concerning threatened actual industrial action by the same union sub branch, June 2006. In January this year a very similar matter was before her Honour, Senior Deputy President Harrison. It concerned the same sub branch and the same area controllers collectively refusing to cover overtime shifts. It seems that on that occasion it was established that the area controllers have an obligation to perform reasonable overtime through their enterprise agreement and that although there was no written notice of the ban of overtime, the sub branch's behaviour was sufficient for her Honour to issue a recommendation that the secondees were, in accordance with their enterprise agreement requirements.

PN42

This matter was before the Commission by the way of a pre reform S99 notification. On this occasion, Commissioner, ARTC - - -

PN43

THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry, could you say that again?

PN44

MS MCAULIFFE: This matter was before the Commission by the way of a pre reform S99 notification, section 99. On this occasion, Commissioner, ARTC has made an application for an order to stop or prevent industrial action. If I may hand up a draft order, if the Commission pleases.

PN45

THE COMMISSIONER: What agreement are you referring to, Ms McAuliffe?

PN46

MS MCAULIFFE: The employees are covered by the Rail Corp/RIC/SRO 2005 Enterprise Agreement, but the requirement to work overtime is as per the SRA 1992 Enterprise Agreement.

PN47

THE COMMISSIONER: Which, for the record, is a functional agreement which the 2005 agreements calls up.

PN48

MS MCAULIFFE: It does call it up. I'm not aware of it as a function agreement.

PN49

MR HOWELL: Commissioner, by way of an explanation, I think the 1992 enterprise agreement actually pre-dates the introduction of the function agreements. It was - - -

PN50

THE COMMISSIONER: I don't think it's an agreement. I think it's an award, isn't it?

PN51

MR HOWELL: It originally came by way of award.

PN52

THE COMMISSIONER: No, that's right. It isn't. It's not an award.

PN53

MR HOWELL: It has a rather complicated history.

PN54

THE COMMISSIONER: I know, I know. The parties always refer to it as an award, but it's an agreement.

PN55

MR HOWELL: In essence it contains the consolidated conditions which have been carried forward in a number of subsequent agreements.

PN56

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. That's also called up by the 2005 agreement. Where's the obligation under the 1992 agreement?

PN57

MS MCAULIFFE: It's section 11.3 - - -

PN58

THE COMMISSIONER: Clause 11.3?

PN59

MS MCAULIFFE: Yes.

PN60

THE COMMISSIONER: What does it say? I don't have it before me because I wasn't - the application doesn't refer to it, does it?

PN61

MS MCAULIFFE: I've got a copy for you, Commissioner.

PN62

THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have one for Mr Howell?

PN63

MS MCAULIFFE: Yes, I do. Page 227.

PN64

THE COMMISSIONER: Now, this particular agreement provision is not overridden by the 2005 agreement?

PN65

MS MCAULIFFE: No, Commissioner.

PN66

THE COMMISSIONER: So there's no overtime provisions in the 2005 agreement?

PN67

MS MCAULIFFE: I don't believe so, Commissioner.

PN68

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, are there or aren't there?

PN69

MS MCAULIFFE: No, Commissioner.

PN70

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, whenever you're ready, Ms McAuliffe.

PN71

MS MCAULIFFE: So 11.3, "employees may be required to work reasonable overtime subject to the conditions set out in this clause and employees shall work overtime in accordance with such requirements," and I actually have some transcript from January when Mr Kessey actually referred to the 1992 Enterprise Agreement Consolidated Conditions of Employment Award that employees are required to work reasonable overtime.

PN72

THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry, what matter is that transcript on?

PN73

MS MCAULIFFE: That was the one we were referring to, that happened earlier this year.

PN74

THE COMMISSIONER: Before her Honour, Senior Deputy President Harrison.

PN75

MS MCAULIFFE: Yes, that's correct and Mr Kessey was able to assist us in that proceeding relating to the actual clause and I've got a copy of the transcript from January.

EXHIBIT #ARTC 2 TRANSCRIPT DOCUMENT

PN76

THE COMMISSIONER: What part of the transcript are you relying upon?

PN77

MS MCAULIFFE: There were questions from her Honour, they're on second to last page.

PN78

THE COMMISSIONER: What's the paragraph number?

PN79

MS MCAULIFFE: It's very hard to - I think it's PN87.

PN80

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN81

MS MCAULIFFE: If the Commission pleases, that's our submission.

PN82

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, what do you say that the Commission should be satisfied under the requirements of section 496(1) - I presume it's 496(1), it wouldn't be 496(2).

PN83

MS MCAULIFFE: 496(4).

PN84

THE COMMISSIONER: They're the orders.

PN85

MS MCAULIFFE: Yes, so - - -

PN86

THE COMMISSIONER: 496(1). Do you have the Act with you? Yes, Mr Doyle?

PN87

MR DOYLE: Commissioner, I think our submission is that there is industrial action by employees. It is happening. It is also threatening, impending and probable.

PN88

THE COMMISSIONER: Is it being organised?

PN89

MR DOYLE: Well, Commissioner, the document we tendered was prepared by the RTBU sub branch Secretary, so our submission is that it has certainly been organised at a local union level. We don't know if it goes any higher than that, but, yes, we would submit that it has been organised.

PN90

THE COMMISSIONER: So you say it's happening and it's threatened and it is being organised?

PN91

MR DOYLE: Yes, Commissioner.

PN92

THE COMMISSIONER: And you say it's not protected action, Mr Doyle?

PN93

MR DOYLE: Commissioner, the secondees to ARTC are covered by a pre reform certified agreement which we understand is in its nominal term and we - - -

PN94

THE COMMISSIONER: And in that regard you're relying on the 2005 agreement which - - -

PN95

MR DOYLE: The RailCorp Agreement, yes, Commissioner.

PN96

THE COMMISSIONER: Which calls up the 1992 agreement where there's no inconsistency in relation to the overtime provisions in the 1992 agreement.

PN97

MR DOYLE: Yes, Commissioner, indeed.

PN98

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN99

MR DOYLE: Thank you, Commissioner.

PN100

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Doyle. Now, Mr Howell, do you wish to give me some submissions? We note that you've raised the issue of clear evidence to be satisfied, but do you wish to give me the RTBUs submissions?

PN101

MR HOWELL: Commissioner, firstly, if I might just have - - -

PN102

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN103

MR HOWELL: Commissioner, I might call Mr Phillip Kessey.

PN104

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, call Mr Kessey.

<PHILLIP NOEL KESSEY, AFFIRMED [12.53PM]
<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR HOWELL

PN105

MR HOWELL: Mr Kessey, your full name, please?---Phillip Noel Kessey.

PN106

And your current employer?---The Rail Train and Bus Union, New South Wales Branch.

PN107

Your position within that organisation?---Lead organiser.

PN108

You've held that position for how long?---Lead organiser for approximately - elected organiser for four years.

PN109

Thank you, and you have - is it right to say you have responsibility for organising the industrial interests of members from the Broadmeadow signal box?---That's correct.

PN110

And, as you understand it, having heard what Ms McAuliffe has outlined today, the area where there is the allegation of industrial action?---Yes.

PN111

Commissioner, I might seek leave to ask questions in leading form. Unfortunately, because of the way the proceedings are proceeding, the question I would normally put to Ms McAuliffe or who had actually appeared to give evidence on behalf of ARTC, I think they will be relatively uncontroversial propositions, but because of the form of the question I ought ask leave.

PN112

THE COMMISSIONER: Ms McAuliffe, do you have any objection to that at all?

PN113

MS MCAULIFFE: No, Commissioner.

PN114

THE COMMISSIONER: No. If you object at any phase, I'm sure you will stand. Thank you, Ms McAuliffe. Mr Howell?

PN115

MR HOWELL: Thank you, Commissioner.

PN116

Mr Kessey, you've heard what Ms McAuliffe had to say earlier today about a meeting which took place on - firstly, a meeting which took place on Monday of this week?---Yes.

PN117

And the provision of a letter by Mr David Ling to a Mr Michael Banks?---Yes.

**** PHILLIP NOEL KESSEY XN MR HOWELL
PN118

THE COMMISSIONER: That's ARTC1 we're talking about, thank you.

PN119

MR HOWELL: Thank you, Commissioner.

PN120

You've also heard Ms McAuliffe outline a meeting which took place yesterday?
---Yes.

PN121

And it was said that you placed a call to Mr Michael Banks at approximately 4.30 yesterday afternoon?---That's correct.

PN122

Do you have anything to say in response to that submission?---There was some discussion about the meeting that had occurred.

PN123

Sorry, this is - I apologise for interrupting you, but this is in relation to the phone call which is said to have taken place at 4.30?---Yes.

PN124

There was a phone call at 4.30?---There was a phone call and the phone call basically was some discussion and it finished with, I asked Michael - he was going to have some further discussion with senior managers and he was going to come back to me. That's how the phone call basically finished. There was some discussion around the MOU and some of the management practices up in Broadmeadow basically.

PN125

Thank you. And in particular the management practices up in Broadmeadow?
---About - there was some discussion about a perception amongst members about the attitude of a particular manager in the Broadmeadow depot, in the Broadmeadow signal box.

PN126

Thank you for that. Have you had any further discussions with any member of ARTC surrounding the terms of that letter since that phone call?---Yes. This morning I received a phone call from a person from ARTC to inform me that they had faxed the notification to our office in relation to this hearing. I then made a phone call to - or I asked the particular person to get Michael Banks to call me. Michael Banks then called me.

PN127

Approximately when, sorry?---It was 11 am, it would have been around that time because I was about to go into a meeting, and I then - Michael then did call me. I spoke to him and said, like, I thought, before anything happened, whatever may have happened, you were going to come back to me with what - he told me that senior managers had made a decision to lodge in the Industrial Relations Commission. I had then informed him that I had spoken to David Ling and that that letter was withdrawn. He told me that he would pass that on to Jenny McAuliffe and Jenny McAuliffe then called me and I - - -

**** PHILLIP NOEL KESSEY XN MR HOWELL
PN128

Sorry, approximately when?---This would have been all within a half an hour. I advised Jenny McAuliffe that that letter had been withdrawn.

PN129

Thank you. Nothing further. Perhaps one further question, Commissioner. Is the RTBU organising industrial action at all so far as you're aware in relation to workers seconded to ARTC at the moment?---No.

PN130

Are RTBU members being - withdraw that. To your knowledge, is the RTBU or, to your knowledge, are any of its members threatening, engaging in or organisation industrial action?---No.

PN131

Thank you, Commissioner.

PN132

THE COMMISSIONER: Could I just ask a question. Mr Kessey, it's Mr Lin, is it?---Ling, L-i-n-g.

PN133

And Mr Ling is?---The Secretary of the Newcastle sub branch.

PN134

Responsible for ARTC1 notice?---That's correct.

PN135

Thank you.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MCAULIFFE [12.59PM]

PN136

MS MCAULIFFE: Could I ask Mr Kessey, that from your statement just then, can ARTC take the secondees, the RIC secondees will work in accordance with the 1992 and the 2005 enterprise agreement and will perform reasonable overtime?---Yes.

PN137

Thank you, Mr Kessey.

PN138

MR HOWELL: Nothing arising, thank you, Commissioner.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [1.00PM]

PN139

MR HOWELL: Commissioner, perhaps it might be timely to take a brief adjournment in order that I can take some further instructions and perhaps have some discussions with my friend.

PN140

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Howell. Ms McAuliffe?

PN141

MS MCAULIFFE: Your Honour, we submitted this yesterday absolutely under the understanding that there was industrial action, it was - - -

PN142

THE COMMISSIONER: No, it wasn't submitted yesterday. It came in at 9 o'clock today.

PN143

MS MCAULIFFE: Last night at 6.30 - - -

PN144

THE COMMISSIONER: It was received in the Registry on the file, it's dated stamped 9.48 am on - it is 8 December, isn't it?

PN145

MS MCAULIFFE: I don't have the actual transmission report with me, Commissioner, but from our understanding it was definitely yesterday evening, last night.

PN146

THE COMMISSIONER: Ms McAuliffe, it's stamped 9.48, 8 December. Now, unless our date stamps are out of whack, I take it that - yes, I can see the top of the - it's been faxed on the 7th at 6.27 but needless to say there's nobody in the Registry.

PN147

MS MCAULIFFE: No. I understand, Commissioner. My apologies. The point I'm making is that last night, post the conversation, we had hoped that Mr Kessey was able to withdraw this position last night. He was unable to withdraw this threat of industrial action, as we saw it, and the industrial action that was occurring. Once the information was faxed to Mr Kessey this morning, we did receive a phone call saying that the notice was withdrawn. I had asked Mr Kessey if that meant that people would be working reasonable overtime. He was unable to guarantee me that and we proceeded to have the hearing here this afternoon.

PN148

MR HOWELL: With respect, Commissioner, it's not for Mr Kessey to say that people will or won't work reasonable overtime. He doesn't know the personal circumstances of every single one of our members based out of the Broadmeadow depot. He can certainly give evidence, as he has done today, that our members will work in accordance with their obligations arising under the 2005 agreement incorporating, as it does, the terms of the 1992 agreement. But that is a far cry, with respect, Commissioner, from giving an undertaking that members will make themselves available for reasonable overtime when and if they are asked.

PN149

Reasonable overtime, the Commissioner would need me to take you to the reasonable hours test case or the provisions in the Act which are now set out as a guarantee about the working of reasonable overtime, but on any view, it would be highly inappropriate for Mr Kessey to make a representation available without knowing the personal circumstances.

PN150

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you, Mr Howell. Can we have Ms McAuliffe finish now? She was in the middle of her reply.

PN151

MS MCAULIFFE: Commissioner, we would say that the industrial action is occurring, still is pending, but we withdraw that it is actually organised with that letter being withdrawn.

PN152

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, how do I know it's still happening? I've just had evidence to tell me that Mr Ling has advised his union, and that's the only evidence that I've got, I don't have Mr Ling here, but I have Mr Kessey giving me sworn evidence that Mr Ling has advised him that ARTC1 has been withdrawn.

PN153

MS MCAULIFFE: We are concerned that the industrial - - -

PN154

THE COMMISSIONER: I'm talking about, is it happening, all right? That's your first one. You say, all right, we'll acknowledge it's not being organised, but you say to me it is happening, furthermore it is - I think you said threatened or impending or probable, I think you said. Prior to that you'd only said threatened, but now you're saying threatened, impending or probable. So how do I know it's happening?

PN155

MS MCAULIFFE: In the past three days it has been occurring - - -

PN156

THE COMMISSIONER: No, no, no. Is it happening now?

PN157

MS MCAULIFFE: Today? I don't know what the shifts are - people haven't called in sick as yet. If we could have a short adjournment I can phone the Broadmeadow Train Control and see - but we have nothing we can submit for today. I can submit some information of the rosters and what's been occurring in the past 21 days leading up to the three days of people not making themselves available.

PN158

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I don't know that it's disputed. I have a notice here. I don't think Mr Kessey's evidence was that it - mind you, I don't think the question is put, but I don't think his evidence went as far to dispute that it had occurred, but then again I may be wrong. The question wasn't put to Mr Kessey either way, but ARTC1 has not been called into question as to its standing and of course the evidence is that that's now been withdrawn. May I make a suggestion?

PN159

MS MCAULIFFE: Yes, Commissioner.

PN160

THE COMMISSIONER: I think it might be beneficial if we adjourn into conference. I think both advocates have sought an adjournment to seek further instructions, but it might be far more beneficial that I have a conference with the parties and if need be, the parties then can seek further instructions and we can return to the record. Do you have any objection to that course?

PN161

MS MCAULIFFE: No objection, Commissioner.

PN162

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, we'll go into conference.

<OFF THE RECORD

PN163

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you to the parties. We've had a discussion in conference and, Ms McAuliffe, I might ask you to address the Commission, please.

PN164

MS MCAULIFFE: Thank you, Commissioner. ARTC, on noting the evidence given by the RTB is willing to withdraw the order as put to the Commission. We also will go into discussions early next week with the Rail Tram and Bus Union to alleviate any concerns over perceptions within the Broadmeadow Train Control.

PN165

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you, Ms McAuliffe.

PN166

MR HOWELL: Nothing further, Commissioner.

PN167

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you, Mr Howell. On the basis of that submission the Commission stands adjourned, thank you.

<ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [2.19PM]

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #ARTC1 NOTICE FROM RTBU PN17
EXHIBIT #ARTC 2 TRANSCRIPT DOCUMENT PN75
PHILLIP NOEL KESSEY, AFFIRMED PN104
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR HOWELL PN104
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MCAULIFFE PN135
THE WITNESS WITHDREW PN138