A not-for-profit NDIS service provider has taken a commercial service provider and an individual to the NT Supreme Court over a mystery legal action.
In the 20-minute hearing this morning, three separate lawyers representing the plaintiff Mental Health Fellowship of Australia (NT), defendants TK Community Care Services Darwin and individual Hayden Sandrey spoke legal jargon, affadavits, and hearing dates.
Every now and again a few words provided a glimpse of what the dispute was about.
The lawyer representing Mental Health Fellowship NT said: "Whilst the first defendant has an undertaking that they will not do any solicitation from now, the [inaudible] that there may have been solicitations in the past, what we need to see is that the second defendant does not engage those clients as a result of the past solicitations."
A lawyer for one of the defendents referenced "page 42 of the affadavit" and spoke a lot of legal jargon which eventually led to the sentence "in those circumstances it's not urgent; first up is a six months alleged restraint that needs to be established in order.."
Trying to "guess" what the legal action is about, will probably end up with Mango sitting in court too.
All parties in today's proceedings were contacted earlier today but did not respond with a public statement prior to publishing.
I will say; I've sat-in as a support person on a HR meeting where an employee and friend of mine was accused of preparing co-workers to come across to a new company he was allegedly starting.
I've worked in another unrelated disability company where an employee was outright sacked for speaking to third parties including a public guardian about breaking away to start his own company, and taking the client with him.
It does happen when staff prepare to leave a disability support organisation sometimes, and they have a strong relationship with a client.
NDIS participants have a legal right to choose their own service providers. One of the basic standards of service provision sets out participants must be afforded "timely exit from a service".
I'm not taking sides. Just bringing you the facts.
The case was adjourned for a hearing on 5th July.
We are The Mango Inquirer.
[Note: Mango must disclose I worked for TK Community Services about five years ago as my third employer while juggling jobs. I left on good terms. I also attended a job interview with the plaintiff Mental Health Fellowship NT but I didn't proceed with employment as it was three-hour shifts that didn't suit my existing roster at the time.]
