Santos seeks communications between Environmental Defenders Office and its star witness

Santos has asked a court to order the Environmental Defenders Office hand over communications with an academic who was a star witness for the failed challenge to the Barossa LNG project.

Santos has asked the Federal Court to allow it to see the communications between the Environmental Defenders Office and a star academic witness, who was later discredited by the ruling judge, as it widens its damages claim for the months-long delays caused on its $5.7bn Barossa project.

Santos earlier this year secured a vital victory against the EDO, which acted for Simon Munkara, who had sought an injunction against Santos’ plans to develop a 262km pipeline for new LNG wells. Mr Munkara argued that the pipeline would cause irreparable damage to First Nations people and their connection to sea country.

Santos chief executive Kevin Gallagher has signalled the company will seek damages from the EDO and others behind the claim, which was forcefully rejected by Justice Natalie Charlesworth in a ruling earlier this year.

In a court hearing on Wednesday, Santos amended its original application for a subpoena to access communications between the EDO and Dr Michael O’Leary, an associate professor at the University of WA, who appeared as a cultural expert for the EDO and Mr Munkara.

Santos previously sought all communications between the EDO and four climate activist groups.

Tiwi islanders Antonia Burke, Simon Munkara and Pirrawayingi Puruntatameri opposed the funding of Santos’ gas projects in the NT. Picture: John Feder

When Justice Charlesworth rejected the application by the EDO, she said the actions of the applicants amounted to “confection” and the coaching of Indigenous witnesses.

By tweaking the application, it marks an escalation of Santos’ attempt to discover the origins of a case that was savaged by Justice Charlesworth and caused it delays and additional costs.

Justice Charlesworth has indicated she intends to rule on Santos’ application within weeks.

Both Santos and the EDO declined to comment, but sources said the ruling will be significant.

The EDO claims it was simply the legal counsel and should not be liable for claims. But should Santos find evidence it went beyond that brief, it is likely to seek claims from the legal group, which could cause substantial risk to the entity.

The Santos victory has already caused alarm within environmentalist groups, which had scored a spate of legal victories that had delayed not only the Barossa project but Woodside’s $16.5bn Scarborough project.

Environmental applicants had argued that the gas giants failed to adequately consult with Indigenous locals.

But after its victory, claims have subsided – a trend exacerbated by Santos’ aggressive attempt for compensation.

Still, the risk remains after the federal Labor government shelved plans to define who offshore resource developers would need to consult with prior to lodging applications with regulators.

The decision has been criticised by regional allies, most notably Japan, which is increasingly concerned about Canberra’s attitude towards gas.

The Barossa project, in which South Korea’s SK E&S and Japan’s JERA have stakes, has been earmarked to guarantee regional gas supplies.

The head of Japan’s biggest oil and gas producer last year warned Australia risked undermining global security through a decision to “quietly quit” the international gas trade.

Mr Gallagher earlier this year said Australia was in the midst of an “anti fossil fuels war”.

Originally published as Santos seeks communications between Environmental Defenders Office and its star witness