If successful in Federal Court, James Hird will weigh up suing the AFL and the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority in a high-stakes decision that would be informed by any fallout reviews of the national drug agency.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In the case that Essendon and Hird have persuaded Justice John Middleton that ASADA's investigation into the Bombers last year was unlawful, and should be rendered invalid, Fairfax understands the next legal avenue Hird and his advisers would explore is suing the AFL and ASADA for conspiracy by unlawful means.
The premise for the claim would be that the AFL and ASADA, working in tandem, made Hird a scapegoat in their investigations, and that ASADA knew the outcomes that the AFL wanted to achieve regarding the sanctioning of Essendon's senior coach.
Hird and the Bombers will have a six-year window in which to launch fresh legal action for damages after the delivery of Friday's Federal Court finding.
Said to be galvanised through the experience, the two parties are confident they will be successful and, Fairfax was told on the eve of Justice Middleton announcing his verdict, would likely appeal an adverse finding.
As far as Hird is concerned, it's understood that findings from any future review of ASADA - judicial or otherwise - would be a critical determinant in any move to pursue a case to sue.
Regardless, it would be a high risk, costly and highly provocative play, but Hird remains driven to repair the damage done to his reputation as best he can.
The situation of an employed senior AFL coach suing the AFL would be extraordinary.
Fairfax understands the legal avenues Hird could take beyond the Federal Court case are yet to be fully explored. There has, however, been some consideration given to the options and the likelihood of success.
Hird called on high profile Queen's Counsel and human rights law specialist, Julian Burnside, to act for him last year, but has taken legal counsel from Nick Harrington and Steven Amendola throughout the scandal that has now tainted two AFL seasons.
Hird's decision to launch Federal Court action with Essendon has cost an estimated $500,000.
Should he and the club leave court in Melbourne on Friday victorious, the Essendon coach who recently completed the 12-month suspension the AFL handed him last August might recoup half of that sum.
Essendon, Hird and the legal team working for him clearly hold the view that ASADA acted improperly - and beyond its legislative powers - during its probe of alleged banned drug use at the Bombers in 2012/13.
It's possible, however, that even if Justice Middleton rules in Hird and Essendon's favour, both parties could be mute on the subject of ASADA being subjected to further formal review. Should a judicial inquiry into the anti-doping agency occur, for instance, Hird could potentially be called to provide evidence.
ASADA stakes its reputation on being independent of government and other outside influence, despite the fact that is government-funded and the federal minister for sport appoints the agency's CEO.
The Federal Court case has heard evidence alleging high-level backroom dealings and interference at both government and AFL level.
Given that the anti-doping investigation concerning the substances Essendon players were administered in 2012/13 remains unresolved, and the fact ASADA is a taxpayer-funded agency, the terrain remains highly delicate and political.
While this did not stop Essendon and Hird taking ASADA to court, there is a view that it could be needlessly inflammatory – and could even prove counterproductive – for either Essendon or Hird to call for the workings of ASADA to be formally reviewed. Calls of this nature would likely come from elsewhere if ASADA loses in Federal Court.
After what is now a 20-month saga that has gained international attention and caused numerous casualties, a loss for ASADA would damage profoundly the credibility of Australia's historically well-regarded anti-doping agency.
Headed by CEO Ben McDevitt since May, ASADA has given the impression it could reissue show cause notices to past and present Essendon players it has accused of using banned drug Thymosin beta-4 even if the Federal Court rules the information it collected jointly with the AFL must be disregarded.
Thirty-four show cause notices have been issued to current and former Essendon players.
ASADA continued gathering information, and interviewing key figures in the case, after the AFL Commission issued record sanctions on the club and banned Hird from coaching for 12 months.
Unless the entire case is abandoned, or there is a compelling order that it be extinguished, ASADA could recommence its investigations in order to pursue the anti-doping rule violations it suspects occurred at Essendon.
HOW THE BOMBERS GOT TO WHERE THEY ARE NOW
THE KEY DATES
2013
January 31: AFL chief Andrew Demetriou and deputy Gillon McLachlan briefed by the Australian Crime Commission. McLachlan asks: "Is it Essendon?" The ACC's Paul Jevtovic replies: "Say no more." Demetriou is reported to have said of the briefing: "A lot not a surprise."
February 5: Essendon self-reports to ASADA and the AFL. James Hird does not agree with the decision. AFL integrity officer Brett Clothier tells the Bombers it will be a joint investigation.
February 7: The ACC and the federal government hold their "blackest day" press conference.
February 9: ASADA chief Aurora Andruska informs Essendon chairman David Evans the anti-doping body would use the AFL's coercive powers. Of the drugs scandal, it was also noted that Prime Minister Julia Gillard "wants it to end".
May 6: The Switkowski report concludes the Bombers had run "a pharmacologically experimental environment".
May and June: Players interviewed by the AFL and ASADA, and reportedly not given the right to silence under anti-doping laws.
June 4: ASADA told that sports minister Kate Lundy wanted an "outcome".
June 4: In another meeting, it's noted that McLachlan's preference is "to do it all at once. If it is going to push up in August, then maybe in October (b/c has to sell $1 million in tickets in finals)".
June 5: ASADA concerned that Andruska was working to the "political agendas of others".
June 24: Essendon captain Jobe Watson reveals on Fox Footy's On the Couch he was given AOD-9604.
June 28: Evans quits amid speculation about his phone call with Demetriou on February 4.
July 31: Essendon lawyers critical about the release of the interim report.
August 2: ASADA interim report is handed to Essendon.
August 13: Hird, football operations boss Danny Corcoran, club doctor Bruce Reid (right) and assistant coach Mark Thompson charged with conduct likely to bring the game into disrepute.
August 21: Hird launches Supreme Court action.
August 27: Hird suspended for 12 months; Bombers banned from the finals, fined $2 million and stripped of draft picks.
September 18: Charges against Reid dropped.
2014
June 12: 34 current and former Essendon players issued with show-cause notices, alleging they were administered the banned peptide, Thymosin beta-4.
June 13: Hird and Essendon launch Federal Court action against ASADA, claiming the investigation was unlawful.
August 11-13: Trial before Justice John Middleton is heard.
September 19: Justice Middleton delivers his final orders.
