Former judge’s associate wants compensation … Relationship with judge … Claims she was ashamed and humiliated after Supreme Court intervention … Court process likely to be examined by equal opportunity authority … Judges’ discomforted by unfortunate turn of events … From our Tasmanian Affairs desk 

Take Justice Greg Geason, who will be remembered for the famous Grand Poobah judicial snog with his associate Sarah Gregory at the opening of law term revelries in early 2021. 

Chief Justice Alan Blow announced that Geason would be “counselled” in order to “protect the reputation of the court”. 

Later a blurry photo appeared in the Daily Rupert purporting to capture the post-prandial pash. 

Ms Gregory says that as a result of the fuss she was hounded from her job and has now decided to take a discrimination claim to Equal Opportunity Tasmania. 

Celebrity discrimination solicitor Josh Bornstein is on the case, claiming that employees are protected from discrimination if they are engaged in a lawful consensual relationship. 

Instead, Sarah was “shamed and humiliated, accused of misconduct, and subjected to punitive sanctions without any fair processes being followed”. 

However, there are also the splendidly vague judicial guidelines about observing appropriate private and public standards of conduct. 

Who shamed Ms Gregory and subjected her to moral censure? Was it because she was to be transferred to work for a different judge, but instead decided to resign from the court altogether? 

The local Law Society and Tasmanian Bar Association added to the frisson, passing-on “members’ concerns” to the court and telling the ABC that they are “satisfied they are being heard”. 

Could Tasmanian lawyers and judges be morally affronted? After all Sarah and Greg would not be the only judge and associate to find happiness in each others’ arms after a few drinks. 

The embrace happened at a lawyers’ beano. Unfortunately, a photo taken by one of the lawyer’s present and it found its way to the Mercury. 

From that point there was an amount of tut-tutting and pursing off lips. 

Sarah has been described in the media as “the partner” of Greg Geason, and our field agent on the island advises that they are “cohabiting”. 

Presumably, the judge would have been aware of his partner’s proposed application to the equal opportunity people, claiming that she had been unfairly drummed out of the regiment. 

In the circumstances, it would be unusual if he had not counselled her about her claim which, according to Bornstein, is because the court did not have “transparent processes in place to manage matters such as conflicts of interest arising from consensual relationships in the workplace”. 

Golly. Geason’s brothers and sisters on the bench must be thrilled that there’s the prospect of Equal Opportunity Tasmania raking through their processes on workplace relationships – fired-up by a complaint from the partner of one of their own. 

Thanks Greg.