THE former principal of a university was yesterday described at an industrial tribunal as a shrewd and skilled manipulator who would stop at nothing to get his own way.

Professor Stan Mason, formerly head of Glasgow Caledonian University, was accused of changing the requirements for a senior university position to suit the experience of his daughter-in-law, Sadie Mason.

Michael Graham, a member of the University Court, headed an internal inquiry into Professor Mason's alleged misconduct. He is a lawyer and does not otherwise work for the university.

Mr Graham said of Professor Mason at the tribunal in Glasgow yesterday: ''If he wanted to get his own way, a nod was as good as a wink.

''In the course of our inquiry, we were told by members of staff that he would suggest a course of action and leave it up to others to interpret his message.

''He knew that the interpretation of his staff would be to do whatever he wanted.''

Allegations of nepotism, combined with evidence that he misused university funds, led to Professor Mason's dismissal from the #123,000 a year post last year.

Professor Mason, who spent 10 years as principal, has protested his innocence throughout and claims he was unfairly sacked.

Mr Graham, 62, yesterday cited the Sadie Mason case as the ''most serious offence''.

He claimed: ''Professor Mason passed the CV of Mrs Mason to the personnel department and then on to the Head of Recreation, Jill Troupe, to consider for the post of Recreational Development Officer.

''The job description for the Recreational Development Officer was then altered by Professor Mason to include different requirements such as business qualifications.

''Mrs Mason had no experience of sporting and leisure management, essential for the job, and had gained business experience working in a bank.

''It was the clear view of Jill Troupe and other members of staff that this was an attempt by Professor Mason to make Sadie Mason's CV more suitable by altering the personal specifications.''

It was alleged that after Mrs Mason was given the position, she made a complaint to personnel about her salary, which she felt was too low.

Mr Graham said: ''Janet Lysaght in personnel told us that Professor Mason then contacted her to ensure that his daughter-in-law received the rise, which was around #3000.''

Professor Mason's lawyer, Alistair Coburn, denied that the former principal had abused his position and argued that if he was corrupt, then he would have created a better paying job for his relation.

The tribunal continues.