Salvatore Vasta’s “pumpkin eater” case overturned on appeal … Unscrambling secret meanings … Union fines reduced … Plus … A special judgment on reasons not to make a transcript available to a litigant …Sal’s latest from our Ringside Reporter 

Justinian had the unpleasant duty in August 2022 to report Sal’s reasons in Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v CFMMEU. 

The Circus judge doled out fines to the union as a result of two of its officials aggressively barging into the Boggo Road cross-river construction site to inspect “some suspected contraventions”.  

Salvatore found that the union reps intentionally hindered construction company personnel, in breach of the Fair Work Act. He slotted the union with a penalty of $126,000 and each of the two visitors with $12,600, payable personally. 

In determining the fines the judge considered the union officials engaged in homophobic conduct. 

Specifically, Luke Gibson, the third appellant, referred to Peter Cullen, a safety manager for the construction company, as “Pete, Pete, Pumpkin Eater”. 

No one in the court, with the exception of Vasta, realised this was a homophobic attack Mr Cullen. 

This was reinforced in Salvatore’s mind by an accusation from the other union man, Andrew Blakeley, that Mr Cullen tried to look at his penis while in the toilet block. 

On appeal, the CFMMEU said that homophobic slurs were not open on the pleaded facts of the matter and, in any event, there is no evidence that “pumpkin eater” refers to sexual conduct – even in Queensland.

To make matters worse, as is usual in Judge Vasta’s cases, he declined to give the parties the meaning of “pumpkin eater”. 

Sal was amazed that no one at the bar table knew that “pumpkin eater” gives rise to homophobic abuse. In fact, there were no submissions to that effect – it was the judge who raised the matter, all on his own. 

Apparently, he had “heard these terrible epithets” in his former life as a crown prosecutor. 

“At the hearing, I did not wish to explain what the term means because it is quite disgusting and I believe that the use of the term was common enough knowledge.” 

In Salvatorespeak, he told counsel:

“I understand that, you know, I may be a bit more worldly than you are, and I may understand how these things affect sections of the community more than you are, but that’s the way it is. 

“That’s why, you know, I’m asked to be a judge because (a) there are things that I have in my experience that allows me to look at these things and see what it is, even if it is something that escapes, you know, both counsel, but anyway, all right.” 

He could not bear to produce the meaning for “pumpkin eater” in his reasons. It had to be explained in an annexure … 

Abrahams J shaved the fines, saying that Sal’s “impugned findings” impacted the assessment of penalties. She said the CFMMEU was up for a total of $100,000 and the two bover-boys $7,000 each. 

In April, Groper, our Western Australian field agent reported that Sal was ticked off for trying to transfer a Circuit Court case he was managing to the Federal Court, on the grounds that it was too complex and he didn’t have time. 

Justice Katrina Banks-Smith flicked it back, saying Vasta “misunderstood his task”. 

Now we find that in May he transferred a case to the docket of the famous Gregory Egan – another of Bookshelves Brandis Circuit Court appointments.

The applicant in the case, Mr John Shaw, asked the judge’s chambers for a transcript of Salvatore’s comments/reasons – which he has refused to provide. 

It’s up to the applicant to orders own transcript, for a fee, Sal insists. 

Vasta’s excuse is that if the reasons were transcribed and then read by Judge Egan, Mr Shaw “would make some form of allegation that the comments that I had made, have, or could influence his Honour. 

“This would be an unnecessary diversion from the disposition of the substantive matter … 

“I am also of the view that Mr Shaw would distribute the reasons more widely and would fixate on them, rather than on the substantive matter.” 

All of which could fuel speculation that the judge has something to hide, particularly as Mr Shaw has accused him of bias.

Judge Egan will be remember for his famous 2018 swearing-in speech where he said: 

What has happened to the compensation cases brought against Salvatore by litigants jailed on spurious contempt charges?

It has been more than 12 months since Wigney J heard the $2 million misconduct claim for damages against the Circus judge brought by “Mr Stradford”, who is suing for deprivation of liberty and psychiatric injuries.

The full bench of the Family Court overturned the jail sentence on appeal, saying it as a “gross miscarriage of justice”. 

Wigney was told that Vasta’s conduct was the “grossest parody of a court hearing”. 

He heard the case on May 24, 2022 and judgment was reserved.

In another case, a Queensland tourism operator, Leigh Jorgensen, is suing Vasta aftter the judge sentenced him to 12 months in the clink for contempt in a case involving an alleged breach of a court order.

A full bench of the FCA found the contempt trial had “substantially miscarried for at least four reasons”, including the “primary judge’s excessive, unwarranted and inappropriate interventions”. 

Sounds like Sal.

Here’s the latest from Federal Law search.