Defamation trial wraps up between Canning mayor Patrick Hall and ratepayer Richard Aldridge

A City of Canning ratepayer lodged 11 minor breach complaints against the district’s mayor in one day, a court has been told. Trial proceedings finished last Wednesday in Perth’s Supreme Court in a defamation case brought by Canning mayor Patrick Hall against former ratepayer association president Richard Aldridge. The court action has thrust Canning’s local government into the spotlight. High-profile lawyer Martin Bennett, who is representing the mayor, said in submissions the case gave a “unique insight” into local government politics, including what he called the “downright nasty conduct of an obsessive minority who call themselves council watchers”. Mr Hall is suing Mr Aldridge over social media posts and comments made at council meetings. Evidence revealed comments, posts and shares to Facebook made by Mr Aldridge, many of which allege Mr Hall misused his title as mayor when he endorsed candidates on his own social page — titled “Mayor Patrick Hall, City of Canning” — in the lead up to local government elections. Trudi Hall told the court in evidence her husband became “worn down” by the comments — some of which date back to 2019 — and at times he was unable to sleep. She said the inference of the comments was that Mr Hall was “endorsing candidates and it was illegal to do so — which it isn’t”. “It was relentless,” she said. “The key problem was everybody out there thought he was corrupt.” The court was told Mr Aldridge made up to 22 complaints to the Local Government Standards Panel against Mr Hall, with many of them determined vexatious. Mr Aldridge, who is representing himself in the trial, has lodged a counterclaim for collateral abuse of process. The court was previously told he intends to plead on the defence of truth. It is understood he had previously engaged Hammond Legal during proceedings, while Mr Hall is represented by Bennett & Co. Multiple witnesses gave evidence throughout the eight-day trial, including Canning councillors Ben Kunze and Amanda Spencer-Teo. Stephen Cain, a former interim chief executive at the City of Canning, gave evidence in which he described the 11 complaints received by Mr Aldridge about Mr Hall as “completely excessive”. He said each complaint lodged with the city took up the time of administrative staff, records staff and the chief executive. “There were 11 complaints ostensibly just about the one matter,” he said. “They were completely excessive.” Under cross-examination, Mr Aldridge said he had lodged almost a dozen minor breach complaints due to the mayor’s alleged “orchestrated campaign” to elect four councillors. Mr Aldridge said elected members endorsing candidates was an issue that could potentially impact “every local government in WA”. He rejected the assertion his Facebook posts naming the mayor were published out of malice and said it was “part of the democratic process at work”. “Mr Hall has every right to influence an election as long as he does so as Mr Hall,” he said. Mr Aldridge described Canning’s local government as an “apolitical body corporate” and said the mayor had “no power” to choose candidates on behalf of the body corporate. “This means when a mayor promotes a candidate of their individual choosing, they are misusing their power,” he told the court. The court was told Mr Aldridge was told by city staff and the Local Government Standards Panel that Mr Hall had not acted improperly. He maintains such decisions of the panel are “ill-conceived”. On the final day of evidence, former MP Larry Graham was questioned over his understanding of the Local Government Act. When asked about the Local Government Standards Panel, Mr Graham said “it is not a court”. “It completely reverses the presumption of innocence into the presumption of guilt,” he said. The former Pilbara MP referenced reforms currently before the State Parliament which seek to overhaul the current system of complaints and abolish the standards panel. Mr Aldridge was granted leave by the court to make his closing submissions in writing, which are due by October 9. Justice Marcus Solomon’s decision will follow at a later date.