WANTED - MORE MUGSHOTS OF GUNNS Ltd BOARD
John Gay (Managing Director, Executive Chairman) • Cornells A van der Kley (Director) • Robin Gray (Director)
Robin Holyman (Director) • David McQuestin (Director) • Christopher Newman (Director) • Wayne Chapman (Secretary)
REQUEST AN EMAIL ADDRESS TO SEND MUGSHOTS FOR DISPLAY

---

IMAGINE BEING SUED FOR CARING + AWARD WINNING A GLOBAL TREASURE, A NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
MOVIES by Gunns writ defendant Heidi Douglas

---

SOME BACKGROUND ON GUNNS LIMITED

---

SEE NEWS TASMANIA [est. Dec 03] FOR OTHER TASMANIAN NEWS
SEARCH FOR Gunns AT NEWS TASMANIA by PICO	SEARCH FOR Gunns AT NEWS TASMANIA by MSN

---

THE WHOLE WORLD WATCHES THE GUNNS BULLY - Hobart Rally 15 Dec 04
• MORE PICS FROM MELBOURNE INDYMEDIA HERE •

News Photo by Gordon Craven - CopyFREE

ZOOM

SOME NEWS STORIES SINCE WRITS SERVED 14 Dec 2004

Is this the end of dissent in Australia? FORUM TOPICS
December 16, 2004
Gunns' action in suing activists could have sinister ramifications, warns Martin Flanagan.
Earlier this year, I wrote an article in which I urged Australians to become concerned about what is going on in Tasmania's old-growth forests ("The sorry state of Tasmania", on this page on March 15). I likened the present period in the island's history to the one, only a few decades ago, when the cause of hydro-industrialisation united the interests of big business, the unions and the Labor and Liberal parties under the mantra of supplying employment, to the extent that dams were continuing to be built long after there was serious community concern about whether such dams were actually required. ........ No doubt there are people in the hierarchy of Gunns with a genuine interest in football. But, again, I cannot think of a quicker path to broad public acceptance in Tasmania than by becoming associated with bringing AFL football to the island. ........ Once again, I am urging Australians to become more interested in what is happening in Tasmania. In Shakespearean terms, Tasmania is the play within the play; it always has been. Tasmania is now a corporate state. It has a supine government and an opposition that is an opposition in name alone. Its Labor Premier, Paul Lennon, demonstrated during the recent federal election campaign that his loyalty to the logging industry outweighed his commitment to a national Labor victory. If Tasmanians opposed to Gunns are silenced, all who challenge the rich and powerful in this country are vulnerable.
MELBOURNE AGE...

SLAPP - Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation

Gunns threatens basic civil liberties 07 April 2006 We, the undersigned, are British lawyers practising, advising and writing in the fields of international, constitutional, human rights and environmental law. We are writing to express our concern at the decision of Gunns Ltd, the Australian woodchip company, to sue 20 environmental campaigners, politicians and groups who have campaigned against its role in the logging of old growth forests in Tasmania. In the law suit, Gunns Ltd seeks damages of $6.8million for what it claims are the unlawful actions of the defendants in protesting about its alleged wrongdoing. We believe that the use of legal proceedings against peaceful protesters amounts to an attack on basic civil liberties, in particular freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, which form part of the essential foundations of any democratic society. If successful, the legal action would not only financially cripple the individual defendants but would have a far-reaching and chilling impact upon the freedom of individuals to protest. We share similar concerns of our fellow public interest lawyers based in Australia. We also recommend that Gunns Ltd learn from the mistakes of another multinational corporation which sought to use litigation as a means of silencing protesters, McDonald's. Its attempt to pursue in the libel courts of London members of a small protest group became the longest and perhaps most high-profile defamation claim in English legal history, the "McLibel" case. The case was a public relations disaster for McDonald's and served simply to underline the importance of the right to free speech and protest as a fundamental human right. Keir Starmer, QC, and 39 other lawyers, Doughty Street Chambers, London, UK. THE AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL REVIEW... ================== Lawyers push for community protest protection Monday, 3 April 2006. There is a nationwide push to prevent big companies using legal tactics to stifle community protest. Almost 150 Australian lawyers have put their names to a statement, calling for reforms to protect a person's right to criticise governments and commercial organisations. They have sent a statement to politicians across Australia, expressing concern about law suits that aim to stifle free speech. Prominent barrister, Julian Burnside QC, says the law should not be used to discourage community debate. "If you take a hypothetical of a big organisation that sues a penniless defendant and expends hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in pursuing someone who won't be able to pay them damages anyway, you can recognise very clearly that that's a case where stifling dissent is the point, rather than recovering damages," he said......... THE ABC... ================== Up writ creek without a voice Critics can sometimes be silenced through legal proceedings, writes Elisabeth Wynhausen 01 April 2006 WHEN Frank Nicklason visited Burnie in Tasmania several years ago, local residents asked him to investigate the possible health risk from fungi and dust in the compost at the bottom of the enormous woodchip piles on the town wharf. The doctor had no sooner called on Gunns, the timber company that put them there, to carry out an independent analysis than he received a letter from lawyers acting for Gunns. "They alleged that I defamed them in calling for the health-risk assessment," says Nicklason, a specialist staff physician at Royal Hobart Hospital and a founding member of Doctors for Forests Tasmania. Gunns demanded a retraction. Nicklason refused to oblige unless he was shown a report commissioned by Gunns; the company declined and that seemed to be that. More than two years later, in December 2004, Nicklason was served with a 216-page writ. He was No.19 in a group of 20 defendants that included Australian Greens senator Bob Brown, the Wilderness Society and some of its employees, the Huon Valley Environment Centre and various activists and environmentalists. They were said to have disrupted logging operations or harmed the company's image or, like Nicklason, had the temerity to raise public health concerns. Looping them all together with the claim that they had conspired to damage its business, Gunns sued for $6.3 million..... THE AUSTRALIAN... ================== Waving the legal SLAPPs stick December 19, 2004 The forestry debate has fallen victim to an old legal trick, Simon Bevilacqua discovers WIDOW Jenny Donohoe learned to call the legal action against her a SLAPP. The New South Wales woman, who blames the death of her husband Jim on a huge writ filed against them by a developer in the 1990s, says SLAPP is an acronym for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. "The trouble with SLAPPs is they are not designed to win in court, they're designed to stop the voice, intimidate and hurt the hip pocket," Mrs Donohoe said. ........ "I can't understand why the Government hasn't stepped in to stop these writ cases." ......... They found SLAPP filers frequently used lawsuits based on ordinary civil claims such as defamation, conspiracy, malicious prosecution, nuisance, interference with contract and/or economic advantage, as a means of transforming public debate into lawsuits. In light of their research, more than 20 US states have now passed anti-SLAPP legislation. SLAPPs spread to Australia in the 1990s. .......... A NSW taskforce from the Attorney-General's office looked into defamation law reform in the 1990s. It found evidence that corporate plaintiffs were using the threat of a defamation writ, or SLAPP, to silence individuals and community groups. .......... In the 1990s the National Association of Forest Industries threatened a court injunction against BBC Hardware unless it withdrew from sale a book recommending recycled and plantation timber over forest timber. NAFI claimed selling the book would be in breach of the Trade Practices Act. ......... "NAFI's attempt to suppress information critical of forest products is indicative of a growing trend among industry interests in their battle to combat government and consumer actions that pose a threat to their industry," she wrote. "The aim of a SLAPP is not to win in court. In fact many SLAPPs have little legal merit. Rather, their aim is to harass, intimidate and distract industry opponents. ........... "Those using the SLAPP win the political battle, even when they lose the court case, if the victims and those associated with them stop speaking out against them. "Not only does a SLAPP deter those involved from participating in political debate freely afterwards, but it also deters other citizens from speaking freely and confidently about similar issues." Professor Beder, in her book Global Spin, says most SLAPPs are won by the people being sued. Most cases are dismissed, and 77 per cent that are heard are won by the defendants. "Such cases seldom win in the courts," Professor Beder said. .......... "It's a lose-lose situation," he said. "The best they can hope to achieve is a win in the courts, they'll lose dreadfully in the public relations war." ............ Gunns Ltd brand manager Sarah Dent said the company did not want to make any further comment. SUNDAY TASMANIAN ... ================== • THE NAFI SAGA... Forest Friendly Timbers Book In April 1999, Alan Gray and Anne Hall launched their book Forest Friendly Building Timbers which outlines alternatives to native forest timbers. National Association of Forest Industries (NAFI) dispatched legal threats to the authors and BBC Hardware, which was selling it. NAFI claimed the book contained false and misleading information and was in breach of the Trade Practices Act. Following the legal threat, BBC Hardware withdrew the book from sale, which pleased NAFI...... NAFI's success was short-lived. After obtaining quick legal advice, the authors went public. ....... Suddenly NAFI was on the defensive. National media coverage focused on the possibility that NAFI might be investigated......... COURTESY EDO VICTORIA... (PDF) John Gay managing director Gunns Limited is also a director of NAFI ASIC Company Extract - National Association of Forest Industries Limited 7 July 2003: Director - John Eugene Gay, 7 Clarence Street, East Launceston Tasmania 7250 Born 12/04/1943 - Deloraine Tasmania Appointment date 23/10/2001 SLAPPS explained by Shane Elson Thursday December 16, 2004 MELBOURNE INDYMEDIA... ================== Dayna Simpson argues that ignoring social responsibilities is a risky business for corporations By Dayna Simpson - Tuesday, January 04, 2005 .......Gunns Limited's recent move to sue the very interests that have fought to define and bound their social responsibilities is a disturbing backward step. The move by Gunns is a strong-arm response to an image problem that affects a comparatively small proportion of their highly profitable and largely un-challenged operations. Gunns should arguably have taken a less antagonistic and more proactive approach to the problem. The Greens and interest groups have presented legitimate social responsibilities for Gunns Limited to consider. Gunns may end this battle doing more damage to its reputation and market share than the Greens and interest groups could have ever hoped for....... ONLINE OPINION...

SO... IT'S ALL ABOUT REVENGE

One last shot at 'greens' Wednesday, 22 December 2004 IN a parting shot at the 'green' movement, departing State Manager for Timber Communities Australia, Peter Cochran has claimed that any successful Court action by Gunns Ltd against ‘green' activists will be sweet revenge for the thousands of timber workers displaced by political action over the past 30 years....... BOMBALA TIMES...

DEMOCRACY AT STAKE

The Gunns writ is an attack on democracy December 27, 2004 The right to protest is under threat - in Tasmania and beyond, writes Steven Curry. Greg Barns seeks to defend Gunns, the Tasmanian timber and woodchip conglomerate, from charges that it is stifling free speech by suing 20 environmentalists and environmental groups for $6.36 million ("Say what you will, this is not about free speech", on this page last Tuesday). He is dead wrong on all counts. ......... In some cases the writ specifies a person or people who committed the acts, which makes me wonder why these individuals are not being sued individually for the relevant damages. In many other cases the writ alleges that "one or more" of the individuals listed performed the action. If they do not know for sure, why impute responsibility to a whole group, at least some of who weren't even present? However, the most damning aspect of the suit is that some of the actions being sued for simply are not criminal acts directed against Gunns or its contractors. One claim is that defendants have engaged in "publicising grievances about the environment and the activities of (Gunns) both in Australia and with its customers and consumers overseas". This is simply a definition of protest. In several other parts of the writ, Gunns allege that signs were affixed to trees and fences on Crown land near logging coups. Entering this land and putting signs on it may be criminal (in no very terrible way), but it is not a crime against Gunns. Protesting against Gunns may damage its interests, but it isn't criminal or wrong. Connecting the protest against Gunns to alleged minor criminal acts against the Crown doesn't alter the fact that Gunns is suing people for voicing their opinions. If the criminal acts themselves give rise to damages, it is the Crown that is entitled to sue, not Gunns. Gunns is not a "victim of crime" just because the crime enabled people to protest against it. ......... Gunns is not entitled to overturn these profound principles in the civil courts......... THE MELBOURNE AGE... ================== About Predictable Opinion from a Not Very Bright Tasmanian Lawyer .......It is not everywhere that the president of a law society would deliver a view such as Zeeman's even though he somewhat confusingly admitted that freedom of speech might be a defence for the respondents...... " FREE SPEECH DECLARED SAFE " ================== Gunns acts on spray claims By SIMON BEVILACQUA - 19 December 2004 A TASMANIAN man has received a threatening letter from forestry giant Gunns Ltd. Gerard Castles, an international businessman who bases himself in Hobart, has been asked to retract a public statement he made about Gunns. "If not, then my client reserves all of its rights," the letter from Gunns' lawyers says. The details emerged in the week Gunns issued a writ against a group of prominent Greens who had protested against the company's forest practices. The letter refers to a letter to the editor written by Mr Castles which said "a contractor working for Gunns sprayed two people with atrazine"........ SUNDAY TASMANIAN... • RELATED - GUNNS SPRAYING CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER... ================== New Tas union chief slams Gunns lawsuit 18 December 2004 Newly appointed Unions Tasmania secretary Simon Cocker has used his first media conference to attack timber company Gunns Limited for the legal action it has taken against 20 environmentalists. Gunns is seeking about $6.4 million from 20 environmentalists for damage to its reputation. Mr Cocker has described the lawsuit as an affront to free speech. "They are a big, rich, aggressive, powerful company which are using their wealth to crush dissent," he said. Mr Cocker says the Tasmanian Government should be more forthcoming with its views on the matter. ........ Meanwhile, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre has described Gunns's lawsuit as an attack on freedom of speech. The centre's state secretary, Trudy Maluga, says businesses which use their financial power to silence critics are appalling....... ABC ONLINE... ================== Forests debate turns into a test for democracy December 17, 2004 If corporate writs can silence Australians who speak out on public issues, our democracy is in trouble. The fate of Tasmania's old-growth forests is a matter of great public interest. A political and environmental debate is raging around Tasmanian forestry giant Gunns Ltd. The company has raised the stakes horribly by launching a $6.3 million damages claim against critics of its actions in old-growth forests, most of which are on public land. The 20 people sued include Greens senator Bob Brown and state leader Peg Putt and representatives of the Wilderness Society and Doctors for Forests. This intimidatory action, which exposes individuals to financial ruin, expands the debate far beyond forests and Tasmania. Everyone who cares about how public issues are decided in a democracy ought to be alarmed by what has been described as a US-style SLAPP writ. "Strategic litigation against public participation" is a US term coined in the 1980s to describe the use of lawsuits to deter or punish individuals who express views on public policy that are at odds with business interests. The practice has so damaged public debate in America that some states have anti-SLAPP laws. Such lawsuits need not succeed in court to achieve their aim; more than three-quarters of US suits are lost, but their threat alone stifles public expressions of concern on issues such as environmental damage, community health and product safety....... MELBOURNE AGE... ================== Timber giant accused of intimidation tactics There are further claims that the Tasmanian timber company Gunns Limited is trying to intimidate its critics into silence. The claims follow the company's decision to take legal action against 20 environmentalists and groups. Earlier this year, Hobart man Gerard Castles had a letter published in a local newspaper about reports alleging that a Tasmanian couple were sprayed with herbicide by a helicopter pilot contracted by Gunns. He says that soon after, he received a letter from Gunns's solicitors denying the incident and demanding a retraction. "I do feel intimidated. I feel as if my own home, if you like, is under threat," he said....... ABC ONLINE... ================== Gunns intensifies its assault on its critics PM - Thursday, 16 December , 2004 Reporter: Annie Guest MARK COLVIN: There's fury among civil libertarians at the latest development in the fight between Australia's biggest forestry company and its critics. It's been revealed that Gunns Limited told a man who wrote a critical letter to a newspaper that he could face legal action if he doesn't retract his assertions....... ANNIE GUEST: When Hobart man Gerard Castles saw news stories about forestry chemicals allegedly being sprayed on a Tasmanian couple and their property, he was so upset that he wrote a letter to the local Mercury newspaper. He was shocked to receive a letter from Gunns Limited in response warning him to retract his comments....... ABC PM...