John Key’s lawyers had argued that the claims were not arguable and that they were also vexatious and not in good faith. Photo / Dean Purcell
John Key’s lawyers had argued that the claims were not arguable and that they were also vexatious and not in good faith. Photo / Dean Purcell
A human rights complaint against Prime Minister John Key over his pulling of a waitress' ponytail has been dismissed.
Serial litigant Graham McCready alleged that Mr Key had breached waitress Amanda Bailey's right to not be sexually harassed at work when he repeatedly pulled her hair in Parnell café Rosie's.
Mr McCready filed papers with the Human Rights Review Tribunal in May after an attempt at a private prosecution of Mr Key failed.
Mr Key's lawyers had argued that the claims were not arguable and that they were also vexatious and not in good faith.
In a decision released today, the tribunal agreed to strike out Mr McCready's proceedings, saying they were "entirely misconceived" and had "no prospect of success".
The proceedings were filed without Ms Bailey's consent or co-operation and the publicity around them had "undoubtedly added to the hurt and embarrassment she has already suffered".
It said there was a fatal flaw in Mr McCready's argument because he had to establish that Mr Key committed the alleged acts in relation to his employment.
Because Mr Key did not pull her hair in relation to his or the waitress' employment, there was no case to be made.
The tribunal said the documents filed by Mr McCready's New Zealand Private Prosecution Services were "ostensibly wrapped in the language of human rights" but were actually "brought to embarrass the Prime Minister".
It concluded: "It should therefore come as no surprise the proceedings must be struck out not only because no arguable case under the Human Rights Act can be established, but also because the proceedings are vexatious, not brought in good faith and are an abuse of process."
