These included visiting her hotel room on a work trip to Sydney in only a singlet and boxer shorts and “surprising” her as she came out of the shower the next morning.
Hughes, the principal of law firm Beesley and Hughes, would also block her exit from the office in what Justice Perram called a “ghostlike practice of hovering in doorways until dispelled by a hug”.
The judge rejected the notion that it was “misguided but lofty-minded romantic conduct” that could not constitute sexual harassment.
He said there were a “tawdry” series of events “about as far from a Jane Austen novel as it is possible to be”.
“Wherever may lie the frontiers of the juristic conceptions … [around] unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, they comfortably enclose the shabby state of affairs in which a man gains access to his female employees bedroom dressed only in his underwear,” he said.
“The trial judge described some aspects of [Mr Hughes’] evidence as delusional. I regret that the same may be said of this aspect of the appeal.”
The Full Court said the appeal was an abuse of process and that the award of aggravated damages usually imposed because of the conduct of a party during litigation was appropriate.
“The pursuit of a meritless appeal for the ulterior purpose of harassing [Ms Hill] is more than sufficient to warrant an order that the costs be paid on an indemnity basis.”
Indemnity costs include all sums other than those that are “unreasonably incurred” and are far more punitive than ordinary costs.
The judges noted that Mr Hughes’ former lawyers, including Mr Morris, had not acted for him at the costs hearing and there were consent orders dismissing the claims against them.
The court said any money that might have been paid to Ms Hill should be deducted from the final costs bill, which can be expected to start at $200,000.