BoardPro and Mowat Communications Examined in ERA Case
11.4.2025. Article 6: S Mowat v CBHS Board of Trustees Employment Relations Authority case. This series examines the hearing from Day 1 to 5. This article includes part of day 3.
Applicant and former Christchurch Boys' High School teacher Susan Mowat was trying to prove that three sets of school publicly excluded (PX) board minutes she had received in November 2019 (from the school after filing a Privacy Act request for her personal file) were not the originals.
On day three, Mowat's claims would be devilishly complicated to explain and prove. The following story does not cover in blow for blow fashion board lawyer AJ Lodge’s questioning of Susan Mowat on this technical aspect of the case.
This was due in large part, because the school, according to husband Rich Mowat had not provided the meta data for the PX board minutes.
Day 2
This allegation went to the heart of Mowat’s Employment Relations case against the school, because it was the school’s handling of the minutes request, that, she intimated, undermined her trust in the board, which was meant to protect her health and wellbeing as an employee in the wake of the anonymous letters saga and investigation, "nocturnal defecation" (words taken from Steve Fraser's later testimony) incidents, a difficult relationship with principal Nic Hill and her March 2019 meeting with board chair Leanne Watson and David Caldwell.
In her view, they (this included the March, 19 June 2019 and August publicly-excluded minutes) had been tampered with, and she had not been provided with the originals. As a starting point supposedly the June and August 2019 minutes she received were made using BoardPro, a technology phased into Boys' High board meetings, in 2019.
But Mowat believed the June minutes did not bear the software's hallmarks.
Her inquiries with BoardPro itself led her to believe these minutes had been made to look like BoardPro minutes (and as originals) and that the real minutes had been created in June (not July as the school had suggested earlier) and had not been provided to her.
School lawyer, AJ Lodge's approach was to undermine the very evidential foundation of Mowat's belief of wrongdoing at the source by trying to show BoardPro and a BoardPro workers called Kim and Matthew had not provided any information specific to Boys' High to Mowat about the school's activities.
Previous articles: #1 through #5.
Former Christchurch Boys' High Teacher Gives Evidence Against Board & Denies Being Behind Anonymous Letters
Day one of the long-running employment dispute between Christchurch Boys’ High teacher Susan Mowat and her former employer begun this morning.
“By this time I was just broken,” Says Mowat in Boys' High Employment Case
Amy Keir completed her draft report in December 2018, says Susan Mowat. But it was in March 2019, that board members Watson and Caldwell informed her that it had not pointed to her.
“Do you want to go there," Says Mowat Under Cross Examination Regarding Defecation Incidents
Day two (Tuesday) of the Mowat versus Boys’ High employment case saw her break emotionally while undergoing cross examination regarding the anonymous letters saga and admitting there was no proof Hill had defecated on her driveway. Mowat had given evidence that faeces were found on her driveway on 8 occasions.
Bones of Contention: The Susan Mowat v Boys' High Employment Case: "Punishing" Cross-Examination By Boy's High Lawyer Puts Mowat Allegations Under Key-Hole Scrutiny
As previously reported, on Day 2 (1 April 2025) of this employment dispute saw the applicant Susan Mowat break down following a question from Boys' High lawyer, AJ Lodge over the Amy Keir's anonymous letters investigation. Lodge put it to her that the Keir thought Mowat was the source of much of the contents of the letters. The hearing was adjourned.
Rich Mowat: Boys' High Board Have Not Released Minutes Meta Data and Won't Say Why
Susan Mowat is suing Christchurch Boys’ High School in the Employment Relations Authority for unjustified constructive dismissal and unjustified disadvantage. The case was heard before ERA member Lucia Vincent between 31 March and 4 April 2025.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The New Zealand Reporter to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.