Markets 
Woodside has failed in its bid to force three activists to hand over documents relating to a protest involving a hoax gas leak that forced the evacuation of thousands of workers from its corporate headquarters in Perth three years ago.
The gas giant was seeking access to all documents possessed by each protester “that identify or contain a description of other persons involved in the planning, preparation and/or execution of the incident” and that each defendant appears in court, “to be examined in relation to the description of any party Woodside may have a cause of action against”.
Kristen Morrissey, Emil Davey and Joana Partyka avoided jail last year after pleading guilty to charges stemming from the protest, which involved Morrissey letting off canisters of “stench gas” in the Mount Street building.
A letter first sent in 2023 by Woodside’s lawyers stated that the company had reason to believe there were other members of the Disrupt Burrup Hub group involved in the protest, and sought to take legal action against them in what the activists described as a Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation – or, SLAPP – suit.
However, in a decision published on Thursday morning, Supreme Court Justice Matthew Howard dismissed that application.
“The Incident was a protest against the activities of [Woodside’s] operation and development of the North West Shelf Project and the Pluto LNG Project … in the north of this State,” Howard stated in the decision.
“The defendants appear to be members of a group known as ‘Disrupt Burrup Hub’. It further appears that individuals associated with the Disrupt Burrup Hub group have carried out various protests against the activities associated with the Projects.
“Notwithstanding that other protests against the Projects have been organised and carried out by members of the Disrupt Burrup Hub group, it is important to bear in mind that the application brought by the plaintiffs is limited to causes of action they say they may have arising out of the incident and not from other protests more generally.”
Despite Woodside having “clearly devoted very considerable resources to their application”, Howard said the evidence put before the court did not give rise to the others being involved in the incident.
“Namely, it appears that no more than the five individuals were identified through the extensive [WA Police] investigation,” he stated.
“The plaintiffs’ application would, if granted, involve a very serious invasion of privacy and confidentiality … that observation must apply with more force to an order that they personally attend Court to be examined.”
The company issued a brief statement in response to the court decision.
“We note today’s judgement and are reviewing it,” a Woodside spokesperson said.
In a statement, Partyka said the decision was hugely humiliating for Woodside.
“Woodside has tried to prevent people from following in our footsteps and calling out Woodside’s destruction because our action was so successful – well, their attempt has been decisively thrown out in under a week,” she said.
Davey said the Browse gas export project would rip off Australians, destroy coral reefs and desecrate ancient Indigenous culture.
“No wonder Woodside has gone to such lengths to silence opposition — because increasingly Australians are seeing through gas exporters as the parasites they are,” he said.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
Holly Thompson is a journalist with WAtoday, specialising in education and the environment.Connect via X or email.From our partners
Read the full article here
