James Cook University has successfully appealed a finding that it unfairly dismissed a professor for criticising colleagues over their global warming research.

July 22, 2020

A Queensland university did not unlawfully sack a professor for slamming colleagues over their research on the impact of global warming on the Great Barrier Reef, a court has found.

James Cook University successfully appealed an earlier finding that it contravened the Fair Work Act when it sacked Peter Vincent Ridd in 2018 after he allegedly spoke to media and bad-mouthed workmates.

Intellectual freedom does not give Prof Ridd the right to trample on the university’s code of conduct, the Federal Court in Brisbane said in a judgment published on Wednesday.

The university alleged the geophysicist had not acted “in the collegial and academic spirit of the search for knowledge, understanding and truth” when he criticised a coral researcher, the Australian Institute of Marine Science, and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies.

“Professor Ridd stated in the email (to a journalist) that those two organisations should ‘check their facts before they spin their story’,” a full bench of the court wrote of his alleged conduct before his employment was terminated.

This was followed by an appearance on a Sky television program with Alan Jones and Peta Credlin, when Prof Ridd allegedly “trashed” JCU’s work with AIMS, the ARC and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, saying their scientific research could no longer be trusted.

He later allegedly raised questions about a colleague’s participation in a conference, saying “you wonder why he is there, it is not like he has any clue about the weather”.

JCU found Prof Ridd had acted disrespectfully and had also ignored orders not to speak about the disciplinary proceedings against him.

It said his actions were “intentionally designed to damage the university’s reputation” shortly before letting him go.

Prof Ridd later challenged the decision in the Federal Circuit Court, saying he was simply exercising his right to intellectual freedom.

That court agreed. It found the university’s actions, including his dismissal, were unlawful. But that decision had now been overturned by the Federal Court following an appeal by JCU.

It said the lower court had erred when it found Prof Ridd’s right to intellectual freedom trumped his obligations to act in accordance with JCU’s code of conduct.

“It is also clear that some of the elements of Prof Ridd’s conduct are unable to be characterised as an exercise of intellectual freedom,” the court said.

“(It was) no more than expressions of personal opinion and frustration … and general criticism of JCU”.