121002/018

Federal Court of Australia

District Registry: Victoria

Division: General Division

James Albert Hird

Applicant

PROCESSED

No VID 328 01 2014

fEDERAL CUIJRT 0 A VICTORIA 6isiRI~j R~~:iALlA

REG<n/ED / FilED TRY

30 JUN 2014 Fees Pt-id Receipt ~ •••.• - ................... ................ . -... ~.::.:.::: . .::~ ............. ; ;;; ; ;;;;;

The Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority

Respondent

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

1. The Applicant:

1.1 was appointed, on 28 September 2010. Senior Coach of the Essendon Football

Club (EFC). a club licensed with the Australian Football League (the AFL) and

subject 10 Ihe AFL Rules;

1.2 at all material times, is and was subject to the AFL Regulations, the AFL Player

Rules and the AFL Anti-Doping Code;

Particulars

Copies of the AFL Regulations, the AFL Player Rules and the AFL Anti­

Doping Code may be inspected upon request.

1.3 has continued at all relevant times, and continues, to be employed by EFC in the

capacity of Senior Coach of the EFC; and

1.4 in his capacity as Senior Coach of the EFC, supervised the preparation, training

and performance of players who participated as players for EFC in the

Australian Rules Football competition in the 2012 season (EFC Players) .

2. The term of the Applicant's employment contract with EFC expires in October 2016.

Filed on behalf 01 (name & role of party) The ARRlicanl, ..,!ames Albert Hird .. ________ _ Prepared by (name of personllalN}'er) __ Steven ~mendo~ __ ._ _ ______ _ Law fi rm (if applicable) ..A~hurstAustrar§.______________ _ _________ _ Tel j~) 9679 ~OO _. ________ Fax .JQ.~ 96~~.!~..!.. ._ __. __ Email _ §.!~e.!l~ndofa@!l§.!!urst.com _____ ____________ __ .... __

Address for service Level 26, 181 William Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000 (include stale and postcode) ._PX . ill!~. Mel9.2.!:!f!!!'!. __ _

[Version 2 form approved 09/05l2013J

·06-3 0 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Regi s try D ? 1 1 0

1lI003/018

2

3. The Respondent:

3. 1 was appointed under s 200 of the Australian Sports Anfi~Doping Authority Act

2006 (Cth) (the Act) as the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Sports Anli~

Doping Authority (ASADA);

3.2 has the functions set out in s 21 of the Act. which functions include such functions

as are conferred by the NAD Scheme set out in Schedule 1 of the Australian

Sports and Anti~Doping Authority Regulations 2006 (herein referred to as the

NAD Scheme and the Regulations respectively);

3.3 has the power, conferred by s 22 of the Act, to do all things "necessary or

convenient 10 be done for or in connection with the performance of his or her

functions";

3.4 at all times was authorised under s 13(1) of the Act and clause 3.27(1) of the NAD

Scheme to conduct investigations of possible anti-doping rule violations;

3.5 was subject to obligations of confidentiality pursuant to which:

06-3 0 16:09 151 2 8

(a) at all times prior to 31 July 2013, the Respondent and his predecessor

were authorised by 5 13(1)(9) of the Act and clause 4.21 of the NAD

Scheme to disclose "non-entry information" obtained during such an

investigation to, inter alia, "a sporting administration body", provided that

Ihe disclosure was ufor the purposes of, or in connection with", such

investigation;

(b) at all limes from 1 August 2013, the Respondent and his predecessor

were authorised by s 13(1)(g) of the Act and clause 4.21 of the NAD

Scheme to disclose "non-entry information" obtained during such an

investigation 10, inter alia, "a sporting administration body", provided that

the disclosure was "for the purposes of, or in connection with ," the

administration of the NAD Scheme; and

(c) the Respondent and his predecessor were (subject to exceptions)

prohibited by s 71 of the Act from disclosing "NAD scheme personal

information- (as defined in 4 of the Act) to any other person;

(the Confidentiality Obligations);

+61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry p ., 11 "

!2I004/018

3

Particulars

The AFL is and was a "sporting administration body" for the purposes

of s 4 of the Act.

3.6 at all relevant times had, and has, the power under clause 4.07A(2) to (4) of the

NAD Scheme to issue a notice (known as a "show cause" notice) to the EFC

Players which notice must, inter alia, advise that the recipient may make a

submission within the "response period", which period may be determined by the

Respondent; and

3.7 issued "show cause" notices on or about 12 June 2014 to 34 individuals who

were EFC Players (the Notices) during the 2012 season.

4. ASADA:

4.1 was established under s 20 of the Act;

4.2 consists of the Respondent and ASADA staff: s 20A of the Act; and

4.3 has the function of assisting the Respondent with the performance of his

functions: s 20B at the Act.

The Joint Investigation - the Agreement

5. In about February 2013, but on a date unknown to the Applicant, ASADA and the AFL

entered into an agreement whereby ASADA and the AFL would conduct, each with the aid

of the other, what both ASADA and the AFL thereafter described as a "joint investigation­

(the Joint Investigation).

Particulars

The Applicant is not able to provide particulars of the agreement until ASADA

gives discovery.

6. In February 2013, the Respondent and the AFL launched the Joint Investigation, pursuant

to the agreement referred to in paragraph 5 above (the Agreement), into the supplements

program implemented by EFC in 2012.

Particulars

The Agreement is partly express and partly to be implied. To the best of the Applicant's knowledge, the Agreement was in writing and was amended in late

-06-30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 311 1 » VIe Registry P 4/11'1

4

February 2013. The original Agreement and documenls recording revisions to it

are in the possession of the Respondent.

The existence of, and aspects of, the Agreement were referred to by the CEO of

Ihe AFL, GWon McLachlan in an email in late March 2013, the content of which is

reported in an article (a copy of which can be provided on request) by Michael

Warner in the Herald Sun on 18 June 2014, "Lawyers for Essendon players ask

ASADA 10 provide evidence allowing them to respond to show-cause notices;

want extension 10 respond" .

The existence of the Agreement is also to be inferred from the subsequent

actions of the Respondent. ASADA and the AFL in proceeding to conduct the

Joint Investigation, as to which the Applicant refers to and repeats paragraphs 9-

16 below and the particulars thereto.

On ABC Grandstand Radio on Saturday 14 June 2014, the Respondent

confirmed that a joint investigation had taken place. A copy of the radio interview

transcript is in the possession of the Applicant's soliCitors and may be inspected

upon appointment.

Further particulars of the Agreement will be provided after the Respondent gives discovery.

As to the Joint Investigation, the Applicant refers to and relies on paragraphs 2

and 3 of the Applicant's Further and Better Particulars of the Originating

Application, filed and served on 23 June 2014.

The Joint Investigation - a purpose

!2J005/018

7. It was a purpose of the Joint Investigation to collect infonnation that would be provided by

ASADA 10 the AFL otherwise than in accordance with:

7. 1 clause 4.21 of the NAD Scheme;

7.2 read with s 13(1)(g) of the Act.

Particulars

(a) That purpose is to be inferred from all the circumstances surrounding

the establishment and conduct of the Joint Investigation and the

circumstances surrounding the preparation and provision by ASADA to

the AFL of the "Interim Investigation Report Operation COSIA Australian

Football League", concerning the 2012 Essendon supplements program

(the Interim Report) on or about 2 August 201 3.

-06-30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry

5

(b) Further particulars will be provided after the Respondent gives

discovery.

Ql0 0 6 / 018

8. Further, it was a purpose of the Joint Investigation that the Respondent and/or ASADA

obtain a benefit it did not otherwise have under the ASADA legislative regime when

conducting an investigation, and could not have without the express authority of

Parliament, namely the power:

8.1 to compel an EFC Player or other person employed by the EFC (EFC support

staff) to participate in the Joint Investigation and specifically, to attend a

recorded interrogative interview; and

8.2 to direct, under threat of AFL censure and sanction, that an EFC Player or EFC

support slaff member respond and answer every question asked of him/her; and

8.3 to abrogate and/or prevent the exercise of the common law right against self·

incrimination on the part of each EFC Player and/or EFC support staff when

participating in the Joint Investigation interview process conducted by ASADA.

l- 06- 3 0 1 6 :09 1512 8

Particulars

The purpose is to be inferred from the statements of the following key

officers of the AFL:

(a) Mr Clothier, Manager of Integrity Services, in an article he co·

authored in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, a copy of

which is reproduced as annexure "DJF·2" to the affidavit of

Dominic James Fleeton sworn on 13 June 201 4, where:

(i) Mr Clothier et al stated: "In February 2013 the AFL and Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency (ASADA) .. .

started an investigation into peptide use at three AFL clubs by using modem investigative techniques'; and

(ii) under the heading "AFL·ASADA investigation"

Mr Clothier et al stated: "". the AFL and ASADA partnered to undertake an extensive investigation into the use of the peptides and other substances in the AFL . . This investigation was focused and centralized, with complementary forensic activities and scientific resourcing that aI/owed the exchange of information and sharing of expertise. Owing to the contract arrangements binding the players and officials to a code of practice, the AFL had extensive and, at the

+6 1 3 9679 3 111 » VIe Reg i st r y

6

time, superior investigative powers to that of ASADA,

which facilitated the inquiry and substantially assisted

both partieS';

(b) Mr Andrew Demetriou, then AFL CEO, on or about 27 May

2014 affirmed the fact of a joint investigation and further stated that the AFL's resources and ability to compel people to give

evidence had assisted the investigation.

1lI007l018

Joint Investigation - the description

9. Under and pursuant to the Agreement:

9.1 ASADA and the AFL agreed to:

(a) use powers of compulsion available to the AFL under the AFL Player

Aules and AFL Anti-Doping Code in order to compel EFC Players and the

EFC support staff to attend intelViews and answer questions; and

(b) share information collected in the course of the Joint Investigation.

Particulars

(1) The existence and characteristics of the Joint Investigation were referred to in the Interim Report (and which may have been updated on 13 August 2013).

(2) Emails were sent by ASADA 10 those required to attend for interview, which attached a document headed "Appendix Bn

, in which sanctions available only to the AFL were set out. An example of such an email was sent by John Nolan of ASADA to the legal representative of the Applicant on 10 April 2013 referred to in paragraph 10 below.

(3) Statements to the effect that ASADA and the AFL were conducting a joint investigation were made on multiple occasions, including by Abraham Haddad (an employee of the AFL) to the Applicant on 16 April 2013, in the presence of John Nolan and Aaron Walker, ASADA investigators, as identified in paragraph 15.1 below.

(4) As to the steps taken constituting the Joint Investigation, the Applicant refers to and repeats paragraphs 10-16 below, and the particulars thereto.

10. On 10 April 2013, the Applicant's legal representative received an email communication

from John Nolan, an investigator employed by ASADA, ahaching an "explanatory

document".

- 06 - 30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry

121008/ 0 18

7

Particulars

A copy of the "explanatory document" is reproduced as part of exhibit "JAH-1" to

the unsworn affidavit of the Applicant, which is annexure "OJF-1 " to the affidavit

of Dominic James Fleeton sworn on 13 June 2014.

11. The "explanatory documenr included statements to the following effect (amongst other

statements):

11 .1 The ASADA and the AFL investigation involved an allegation that AFL athletes

and support persons may have used prohibited substances and may have

engaged in prohibited methods.

11 .2 Rule 12.7 of the AFL's Anti-Doping Code demanded that each player, club,

officer and official, upon request of the AFL General Manager Football Operation

or the AFL Medical Officer:

(a) fully cooperate with any investigation;

(b) fully and truthfully answer any question asked for the purpose of such

investigation; and

(c) provide any document in their possession or control relevant to such

investigation; and

11.3 "Failure to comply with the requirements of this notice may be acted upon by the

AFL as a breach of the AFL's Anti-Doping Code which if perused [sic] by the AFl

could be sanctioned at the discretion of the AFL Tribunal under the Anti-Doping

Code rule 14.11".

12. Pages 6-8 of the "explanatory document" contained, without accompanying explanation, a

copy of Division 137 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code.

13. On 10 April 2013, the Applicant received a letter, dated 12 April 2013, from Brett Clothier,

Manager - Integrity SelVices of the AFl (the AFL letter) , headed "Notice for IntelView:

James Hird".

Particulars

A copy of the AFL letter is reproduced as exhibit "JAH-2" 10 Ihe unsworn affidavit

of the Applicant, which is annexure "OJF-1" 10 the affidavit of Dominic James Fleelon sworn on 13 June 2014.

· 06 - 30 16 : 09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry P Po h 0

~~, ww ~ V ~ .. ,~" .. ~.,: "'u rlV. +01 j 'Jb t'J ]111 tai009/0 1 8

8

14. The AFL lelter included statements to the following effect (amongst other statements):

14.1 The AFL and ASADA were undertaking an investigation into the production,

distribution, and use of prohibited substances in the AFL (defined in the AFL

letter as "the Investigation").

14.2 Clause 12.7 Of the AFL Anti-Doping Code placed obligations on relevant persons

10:

(a) fully cooperate with any investigation;

(b) fuUy and truthfully answer any question asked for the purpose of such

investigation; and

(c) provide any document in their possession or control relevant to such

investigation.

14.3 AFL Player Rule 1.8 obliged relevant persons, amongst other obligations, not to:

(a) give any false or misleading evidence to any hearing or investigation

conducted under the AFL Rules and Regulations;

(b) refuse or fail to attend or give evidence as directed at any inquiry when

requested to do so; and

(c) refuse or fail to cooperate with any investigation conducted by the AFL

under the AFL Rules and Regulations.

14.4 The Applicant was required under the AFL Player Rules and clause 12.7 of the

Code to attend, on 16 April 2013, an interview with the AFL and ASADA in

relation to the Investigation.

14.5 "Failure to comply with the requirements of the Notice may be acted upon by the

AFL as a breach of the AFL Player Rules and/or a breach of the Code."

15. On 16 April 2013, the Applicant attended an interview with ASADA and AFL

representatives (the Interview).

15.1 The IntelView was introduced by Abraham Haddad, an employee of the AFL (the

AFL Employee), and then principally conducted by ASADA investigators John

Nolan and Aaron Walker.

14-06-30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » Vie Registry P q/1R

21010/018

9

15.2 The AFL Employee and the two ASADA investigators were present throughout

the Interview which lasted approximately 9 hours and involved the Applicant

answering more than 1300 questions.

15.3 At the commencement of the tnterview, the AFL Employee said to Ihe Applicant,

in the presence of the two ASADA investigators, words to the following effect:

"This is a joint investigation between AFL and ASADA - the Australian

Sports Anti-Doping Agency - and it's run under the rules of the AFL."

15.4 The AFL Employee informed the Applicant, also at the commencement of the

Interview. that if the Applicant refused 10 answer any of the Questions put to the

Applicant by the AFL employee. the Applicant's refusal could result in sanction

under the AFL Rules.

15.5 Neither of the two ASADA investigators contradicted the AFL Employee's

statement set out in paragraph 15.3 above.

15.6 Neither of the two ASADA investigators;

) 14 -06-3 0 16: 09 15128

(a) asked the Applicant whether the Applicant consented to the disclosure to

the AFL of the information that the Applicant supplied in the course of

the interview; or

(b) informed the Applicant that the Applicant had a right 10 refuse to

consent, or a right to withhold consent. to the disclosure to the AFL of

that information; or

(c) stated to the Applicant that the ASADA legislative regime did not

abrogate the common law right against self-incrimination; or

(d) stated to the Applicant that he had the right to refuse any question on

the ground that it might incriminate him; and

(e) stated to the Applicant that, pursuant to the ASADA legislative regime.

the Applicant, upon being interviewed, had the right to remain silent

without penalty or censure.

+61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry P 10/18

IilIOll/Ol8

10

15.7 At the commencement 01 the IntelView, counsel for the Applicant and the AFL

Employee engaged in a discussion to the following effect:

Mr Nolan se:

AFL Employee:

Mr Nalan se: AFL Employee:

Mr No!an SC:

Now, gentleman, we don 't want to enter into any

debate as to the legal arguments today as to the

nature of the joint investigation as distinct from

two separate investigations. We'll put that

debate to the side for a later lime, if necessary

Okay. ThaI's good

We understand that's what you say

Yeah

And he understands what you say.

15.8 After the Interview, the Applicant was directed by the AFL to produce the

Applicant's mobile phone for forensic examination; and the Applicant complied

with that direction.

Particulars

A copy of the AFL direction is reproduced as exhibit "JAH-3" to the

unsworn affidavit of the Applicant, which is annexure "DJF-l " to the

affidavit of Dominic James Fleeton sworn on 13 June 2014.

16. From May 2013, the AFL and ASADA intelViewed approximately 48 EFC Players as part

of the Investigation (the Player Interviews).

16.1 Each EFC Player was given a notice to attend the applicable Player IntelView in

substantially the same terms as the AFL letter given to the Applicant, referred 10

in paragraphs 13 and 14 above.

16.2 Each intelView was conducted by at least one AFL employee and at least one

ASADA employee.

16.3 At the commencement of each Player IntelView, an AFL employee made

statements to the EFC Player, in the presence of at least one ASADA employee,

to the same effect as:

1- 06 - 3 0 1 6 :09 1512 8

(a) the statement made 10 the Applicant referred to in paragraph 15.3

above; and

(b) the statement made to the Applicant referred to in paragraph 15.4

above.

+61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry P 11 h 0

t21012/018

11

16.4 The statement referred to in paragraph 16.3(a) above was not contradicted by

any ASAOA employee present at the lime of the relevant Player IntelViews.

16.5 None at the ASADA employees who were present at any Player IntelViews:

(a) asked the EFC Player whether the EFC Player consented to the

disclosure to the AFL of the information that the EFC Player supplied in

the course of the Player IntelView; or

(b) informed the EFC Player that the EFC Player had a right to refuse to

consent, or a right to withhold consen!, to the disclosure to the AFL of

that information.

The Interim Report

17. After intelViewing the Applicant, the EFC Players and other EFC support staff during the

Joint Investigation, ASAOA, amongst other actions, used such information as was

obtained from those parties during the investigation to draft the Interim Report.

18. On dates known to the Respondent, ASAOA provided drafts or versions of the Interim

Report or parts thereof to the AFL.

19. On dates known to the Respondent but by about 2 August 2013 ASAOA provided the

Interim Report to the AFL.

20. On dates unknown to the Applicant, the AFL then provided copies of the Interim Report

to:

20.1 members of Ihe AFL executive;

20.2 each and every member of the AFL Commission; and

20.3 other persons and entities, unknown to the Applicant. who were neither athletes

nor persons otherwise permitted by the Act and the Regulations to receive the

information contained in the Interim Report.

21. By providing the Interim Report. including any versions or drafts thereof, 10 the AFL, the

Respondent and ASAOA:

21.1 acted in breach of the Confidentiality Obligations (the Confidentiality

Obligations) imposed on them by the Act, s 13(1 )(t) and (g) and s 71; and the

NAO Scheme, clause 4.21; and

06-30 16 :09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » Vie Registry P 1")/10

_ __ _ 'W~ .. ~O,~ ~J.J.J. 1dI013/01B

12

21.2 acted for purposes extraneous to those of the Respondent and ASAOA in

furthering their own investigation into possible violations of the anti-doping rules

in the NAD Scheme.

22. In the period after the publishing of the tnterim Report, the Respondent and the AFL

continued in their Joint Investigation into the EFC, the EFC Players and the EFC support

staff and each of them continues in that investigation to this day_

Particulars

On or about 13 August 2013, Mr Andrew Oillon, Chief Legal Counsel for the AFL,

stated thal lhat Joinllnvestigation remained open.

After 31 August 2013, but at a time unknown to the Applicant, ASAOA and the

AFL carried out further inteNiews as part of the Joint Investigation, including of

Dean Robinson, who is a former member of the EFC support staff.

The Notices

23. On or about 12 June 2014, ASADA prepared documents that purported to be notices to

34 EFC Players under clause 4.07A of the NAD Scheme (the Notices).

Particulars

(a) Copies of the Notices are in the possession of the Respondent.

(b) The Applicant is not able to provide particulars of the Notices until the

Respondent gives discovery.

24. On or about 13 June 2014, ASADA delivered the Notices to 34 EFC Players.

Consequences of conduct of Joint Investigation

25. Because:

25.1 the Respondent and ASADA lacked any power to conduct the Joint Investigation

with the AFL;

25.2 it was a purpose of Ihe Joint Investigation 10 collect information for a purpose not

contemplated by the Act and the NAD Scheme - namely, disclosure in the form

of the Interim Report to the AFL, otherwise than in accordance with clause 4.21

of the NAD Scheme, read with s 13(1)(g) of the Act;

.4-06-30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry

~OIOti ;1014 MaN 16: 21 FAX +61 3 9679 3111 121014 / 018

13

25.3 the Joint Investigation was conducted in contravention of the Confidentiality

Obligations; and

25.4 the Joint Investigation was conducted in a manner that precluded the exercise by

the Applicant and/or any EFC Player or EFC support staff of the common law

right against sell-incrimination;

25.5 the Interim Report was disseminated by ASADA in breach of the Confidentiality

Obligations and for purposes extraneous to Ihe furthering of ASADA's own

investigation;

the information collected during the Joint Investigation (being the information on which the

Interim Report was based) cannot qualify as evidence or information received by the

Respondent for the purposes of clause 4.07A(1) of the NAD Scheme.

Particulars

The elements of the Joint Investigation relied on by the Applicant that were not

authorised by the Act, ASAOA Regulations or NAO Scheme or which

contravened the Confidentiality Obligations included:

(a) the conducting of joint interviews by ASADA and the AFL;

(b) ASAOA's reliance on the AFL's powers to compel EFC Players and EFC

support staff to give evidence under threat of sanclions from the AFL;

(c) ASADA's use of Ihe AFL's investigative powers and powers of compulsion

that were not available to ASAOA;

(d) ASADA's disclosure to the AFL, of confidential information and documents

obtained by ASADA in the course of its investigation, including the

immediate disclosure of information obtained through interviews

consequenl on Ihe AFL's attendance at interviews;

(e) the rendering ineffective ai, or alternatively, the imposition of a prohibition

on, the Applicant exercising his common law right against self­

incrimination; and

(f) the provision of the Interim Report, including all versions thereof, by

ASADA to the AFL.

26. In the absence of such evidence or information, the Respondent had and has no power,

under clause 4.07A(1) and (2) of the NAO Scheme, to:

26.1 determine that there is a possible non-presence anti-doping rule violation that

warrants action by the Respondent; or

~01 4 -0 6 -30 16 : 09 1 5 128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry P 14/18

30/06 2014 MON 16: 21 FAX +61 3 9679 3111 ~015/01B

14

26.2 give a notice to the Applicant or any EFC Player or other EFC support staff of a

possible non-presence anti-doping rule violation.

27. In the premises:

27.1 the Respondent has no power under clause 4.07A(2) of the NAD Scheme to

issue any notice to the Applicant; and

27.2 the Notices issued to the EFC Players by the Respondent on or about 12 June

2014 were ultra vires, alternatively liable to be set aside as invalid or improperly

issued.

28. In the absence of a valid notice having been issued by the Respondent under clause

4.07A(2) of the NAO Scheme, the Respondent has no power to refer the Notices to the

Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel (the Panel) for consideration by the Panel under clauses

4.09(2) and 4.10 of the NAD Scheme.

Effect on the Applicant's interests

29. The Applicant is and was at all relevant times employed as coach of EFC, a club

registered with the AFL and subject to the AFL Rules.

Particulars

The Applicant refers to and repeats paragraph 1 above.

30. The issuing by the Respondent of any "show cause" notices to the Applicant, any EFC

Player or EFC support staff arising from or relying on information obtained in the Joint

Investigation is likely to cause the Applicant damage to his reputation and business

interests.

Particulars

The prejudice to the Applicant arises from the adverse publicity relating to his

position as Senior Coach of EFC during the relevant period.

31. The making of entries on the Register of Findings concerning the Applicant, any EFC

Player or EFC support staff consequent upon the issue of an invalid notice by the

Respondent under clause 4.07A(2) of the NAD Scheme is likely to cause the Applicant

damage to his reputation and business interests.

Particulars

The making of entries on the Register of Findings is likely to cause the Applicant damage because, following the making of such entries:

2014-06-30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry PIS/le

15

(a) the AFL General Manager - Football Operations is obliged, or likely, to

issue Infraction Notices under clause 13 of the AFL's Anti·Doping Code to,

inter alia, EFC Players;

(b) recipients of Infraction Notices will face the AFL Tribunal which could lead

to adverse findings or to the imposition of sanctions under clause 14 of the

AFL Anti·Doping Code;

(c) the AFL may seek to impose sanctions in its discretion on the Applicant

uf"!der clause 22 of the AFL Anti-Doping Code; and

(d) the reputation and business interests of the Applicant would be adversely

affected if any EFC Player who received "show cause notices~ was

ineligible to train or compete in the 2014 and/or 2015 seasons:

Claim for relief

(i) for any remaining part of the Applicant's tenure as Senior Coach of

EFC; and

(ii) by reason of alleged conduct during any part of the Applicant's tenure

as Senior Coach of EFC.

32. The Applicant claims the following relief:

141016/018

1. A declaration that the investigation conducted by ASADA into the Applicant and the

players who were on the Essendon Football Club playing list during the 2012

football season (the EFC players) and which was referred to by ASADA as part of

"Operation Cobia" (the investigation) was ultra vires the Australian Sports and Anti·

Doping Authority Act 2006 (the Act). the Australian Sports and Anti-Doping Authority

Regulations 2006 (the Regulations) and the NAD Scheme in Schedule 1 to the

Regulations (the NAD scheme).

lA. A declaration that ASADA, by providing the document it called an "interim reporr',

including any versions or drafts thereof, to the Australian Football League:

(a) acted in breach of the confidentiality obligations imposed on ASADA by the

Ac1 (s 13(1)(/) and (g) and s 71) and the NAD Scheme (clause 4.21 ); and

(b) acted for purposes extraneous to those of ASADA in furthering its own

investigation into possible violations of the anti-doping rules.

2. An injunction restraining the Respondent from issuing 10 the Applicant a notice

under clause 4.07A(2) of the NAD Scheme arising from or relying on information

obtained in the investigation.

· 06 - 30 16:09 15128 +61 3 9679 3111 » VIe Registry

121017 / 018

16

3. An injunction restraining the Respondent from issuing 10 any further notice under

clause 4.07A(2) of the NAD Scheme arising from or relying on information obta ined

in the investigation to any EFC ptayer.

4. A permanent injunction restraining the Respondent from using any information

obtained in the investigation for any purpose under the Act, the Regulations and the

NAD Scheme.

4A. An order setting aside all notices issued by ASADA to the EFC Players (the

Notices) purportedly pursuant to clause 4.07A(2) of the NAD Scheme.

4B. Further or alternatively:

(a) an order permanently staying the operation of the Notices; or

(b) an injunction restraining the Respondent from requiring a response to, or

otherwise taking any action in reliance upon, the Notices.

5. Costs.

6. Such further or other relief as the Court considers just.

Dated: 30 June 201

1)Ll , ___ ._. ______ .. L: __ . _______ _ Signed by Steven Am dola -

Lawyer for the Applicant

This pleading was prepared by Counsel Peter Hanks, Nicholas Harrington and Rachel

Walsh.

·06 -3 0 1 6 :09 1 5 128 +61 3 967 9 3 111 » VIe Re gistry

~0 16 / 01 6

17

Certificate of lawyer

I Steven Amendola certify to the Court that, in relalion to the statement of claim filed on behalf of

the Applicant, the factual and legal material available to me at present provides a proper basis

for each allegation in the pleading.

Date: ~ 0 er \..vt.-l- 'La l t.,

c:::: Signe~· - ndOta------ --- ---

Lawyer for the Applicant

, -06 -3 0 16:09 1 512 8 +61 3 96 79 3 111 » VIe Re g is t ry

12I001/018

Facsimile transmission

AShurst Australia

level 26

181 Willillm Street MelbOurne VIC )000 Austrllllll

GPO Box 99)8 ~'elbourne VIC )001 Australia

Tel ... 61) 9679 lOOO f ill( ... 6 1 ) 96793111 OX l88 Melbourne www.ilshurst.com

Steven Amendola

Attention Federal Court of Australia Our ret SPA\DFl \03 3001 3207

Victoria Registry

Town and country Melbourne Your ret VlD328j2014

f llx number (03) 8600 3351 EITIIIU steven.llmendola@ashl.lrst.com

Telepl'lonf; number (03) 8600 3333 Dire.;!; telephone number +61 3 9679 3628

Oate 30 June 2014 Tota l numter of pages 17 pages to foHow

If there are any problems with this transmission please contact ou r facsimile operator on +61 3 96793000.

VID3 28 / 2014 - James Albert Hird v Th e Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority

Dear General Manager

Please file the enclosed Statement of Claim.

Please post a stamped version of the document to Ashurst Australia, level 26, 181 WillJam Street , Melbourne, Victoria 3000.

Yours faithfully

Ashurst Au stralia

TIM mes~,ge Is sent In con lidcn<>! (0' the ~ddr<!nee OIlIV. It may cOIltaln ~a.y plM~ InfOl'matlon. n.e contetllS are 1101 to b!! <ll.do • ..., 10 ""YOrl<! other Ih.ln II>e ~d,nsee. Unlllltllo<1sed '~plent. ar<! ' e<!uesteO to pr<!ser\le thlJ confidentiality and 10 .dvlse lhoe sender Irnrnedllttly of l roy e. ror In U~,..rnl~on.

AUSTAAUA, B~laIUH CHINA, FAAUC f GUNAA'Y HOH(; ICOtlG SAR ll1oo"E$IA, (ASSOCtATtD OffICe) lT~lV JlP~ PA,PUA New GUIllfA. SoouoI/UtA!)tA, StN(';APORt SrA,1N SV/eO~N UNITfD AAAa EHIAATt"5 u:<lrw KLN:iOOH UtllT!O STAllS 01' AHElttCA A,USTItAUA\fl\2JO.16l1 1.0 1

MI ... "t AuW~"a (A611 '5 304 286 095) I~ I gene<;oI patt_""" con.tllut!O unoltr the I~wt of . he AuWalj~" c..~i\al Tcrritory en<! Is part oIlhe As"",,,SI GtoIoP. lhe Ast.ursl Group hu 3" ofnce I,. caCh of the pl<><:n IiSled .bow.

-06-30 16 : 09 15128 +61 3 9679 311 1 » VIe Registry ~ .. - -