Barbara Etter is suing the state government for a breach of contract after she quit as chief executive officer of the corruption watchdog last year. 

She alleges employees were encouraged to reject her authority and expertise and she was ``repeatedly, unreasonably and unfairly ambushed'' by informal assessments of her performance.

She appeared in the Supreme Court in Hobart yesterday for a hearing to amend her statement of claims. 

Frank Neasey, acting on behalf of the state government, objected to a section of the document that detailed incidents Ms Etter cited as examples of breaches of contract.

The incidents listed included:

 A direction from the board that the deputy chief executive officer be added to a selection panel assessing candidates for a new position;

 Her name being rubbed off a whiteboard listing all commission employees;

 Chief Commissioner Murray Kellam's lack of concern about a distressing family matter Ms Etter was dealing with;

 No records being kept of board meetings held without Ms Etter; and

 The board ordering a succession plan be prepared in case of the sudden absence of the CEO. 

Mr Neasey said, even if proven, the examples only showed it was not a very enjoyable place to work for Ms Etter and she had a poor working relationship with Mr Kellam.  

``Taking the best view of them, they simply amount to nothing. They could be met legitimately with the response `well so what?' '' Mr Neasey said. 

Ms Etter's lawyer Daniel Zeeman argued the incidents should not be considered in isolation and clearly linked to breaches of the terms of Ms Etter's contract. 

He said they showed the work environment made it impossible for Ms Etter to perform her duties. 

The incidents form only one part of the 14-page statement of claims that also states Ms Etter resigned after being told she would face a performance review which ``could be fatal'' if she stayed on.

She served just 15 months of her five-year contract.

Justice Stephen Holt adjourned the matter.