A judgment in a lawsuit brought by allegedly corrupt developer John Woodman against Victoria’s integrity watchdog will be kept secret for weeks while it remains subject to a confidentiality order.
Supreme Court Justice Tim Ginnane on Thursday released the confidential judgment to the Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission and lawyers acting for Woodman after the developer took legal action to prevent IBAC from tabling a report in state parliament in March.
Developer John Woodman leaving the IBAC hearing in 2019.Credit: Justin McManus
Operation Sandon, IBAC’s long-running investigation of allegedly corrupt land deals in Melbourne’s south-east, was expected to be tabled in parliament in the first half of this year, but has been delayed by Woodman’s legal action, which has successfully kept the report under wraps for months.
Woodman claimed IBAC denied him procedural fairness and breached its statutory obligations by not providing him with a reasonable opportunity to respond to the draft report, which mentions him 1450 times among hundreds of pages.
Woodman’s case was heard over the past eight months in closed court and the file is subject to a confidentiality order, meaning the judgment is restricted and not available for public release.
Justice Ginnane will consider whether a redacted version of the judgment can be published online after hearing submissions from IBAC and Woodman in the coming weeks.
Woodman’s lawyer, Andrew Tragardh, from Duxton Hill, declined to comment.
The IBAC report is not expected to be released before the Victorian state election, held on November 26.
In redacted submissions released by the court in June, lawyers acting for IBAC said Woodman’s claims for “declaratory and other relief are baseless”.
IBAC provided a draft report to Woodman in two parts, in December last year and January this year, so he could respond to the allegations.
A Victorian anti-corruption probe into developer John Woodman centres on his influence in political circles. Credit: Justin McManus
“The draft report provides Mr Woodman with a reasonable opportunity to respond to IBAC’s proposed adverse comments and opinions,” the lawyers said.
“There is no basis for Mr Woodman’s claim that IBAC is required to disclose all the documents before IBAC or on which it may have relied in preparing the report.
“In any event, Mr Woodman and his legal representatives have had access for a significant time to the bulk of the documents on which IBAC has relied.”
In a separate legal matter involving IBAC but unrelated to Woodman, The Age on Tuesday lost a challenge to a suppression order over large parts of an injunction case brought against the paper.
The injunction stopped publication of draft findings of an investigation the IBAC was still finalising.
In June, IBAC’s head, Robert Redlich, complained to the attorney-general that laws allowing people to challenge his draft findings in court were delaying the timely release of corruption reports.
In IBAC public hearings in 2019 and 2020, Woodman was accused of paying more than $1.2 million to City of Casey councillors and buying political influence by pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into Labor and Liberal party coffers.
Operation Sandon has been one of IBAC’s longest-running investigations, and is likely to lead to sweeping recommendations for reform, especially in transparency and integrity at local government level.
In June 2020, Woodman abandoned a defamation action against current and former staff at the City of Casey.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.