The Queensland supreme court has struck out substantial parts of Indian mining giant Adani’s case against environmental activist Ben Pennings, describing some of the company’s claims as “confused and embarrassing”.
Speaking outside the court on Friday, Pennings said he was “extraordinarily relieved” by the judgement, but that the case remains afoot. Adani has until February to potentially re-plead the sections of its claim that were disallowed by Justice Susan Brown.
In a lengthy published judgement, Brown struck out Adani’s allegations that “demands and threats” by Pennings had ultimately caused two companies – Greyhound and Downer – to withdraw from contracts to provide services to the Carmichael mine.
Brown found that Adani’s pleadings in relation to Greyhound were “embarrassing” because they did not demonstrate a “causal nexus” between alleged demands and threats by Pennings, and a decision by the bus company to withdraw from negotiations.
In relation to Downer, Brown found that Adani’s pleading was “inconsistent with the evidence that has been placed before the court”, that there were “a number of concerning aspects” about the claim, and that it had considerable weaknesses.
Friday’s judgement followed a hearing in January where lawyers for Pennings argued that Adani’s actions amounted to an “abuse of process”. Adani had argued there was “sufficient factual foundation” to support its pleadings.
Brown did not find that the case amounted to an abuse of process, and as a consequence she will allow Adani to file a new statement of claim in February.
The court ruled that a costs order – made by the court against Pennings after a preliminary hearing in 2021 – be stayed until the conclusion of the proceedings.
The case began in 2020 but has progressed slowly – in more than four years it has not proceeded past the pleadings stage.
In 2020 Adani made an unsuccessful application to conduct an unannounced search of Pennings’s family home, for possible evidence he had obtained its confidential information related to the Carmichael coalmine.
Court documents in that case detailed that Adani hired a private investigator to surveil the activist and his family members, including taking photographs of him walking his then nine-year-old daughter to school.
Adani then lodged a civil claim against Pennings, the national spokesperson for the group Galilee Blockade, alleging he sought to disrupt the operations of the Carmichael coalmine, its suppliers and contractors.
In 2023 Adani dropped the part of its claim that Pennings had unlawfully accessed secret information.
Michael Hodge KC, for Pennings, told the court in January this had been the miner’s “primary cause of action” and that the remaining elements of its case were “embarrassing”, “incredibly weak” and “highly problematic”.
Speaking outside court after the judgement, Pennings said: “I’ve come out of court a very, very happy man.
“The case is not over completely. But the vast majority of the allegations against me have been struck out.
“I’m extraordinarily relieved that after four and a half years the judge has thrown out a number of allegations that we’ve always argued were spurious and anti-democratic … against a peaceful protester.
“It’s lasted four and a half years. The dude ultimately taking it against me is worth $100bn. I haven’t got [that]. I’ve got very little.”
In a statement, Adani Mining said the company welcomed the decision “to reject anti-coal activist Ben Pennings’ application to have our civil legal proceedings against him thrown out of court”.
“We brought these civil proceedings against Mr Pennings in 2020 to enforce our rights and allow employees and contractors of our Carmichael mine near Clermont in central Queensland to carry out legal and legitimate business activities free from intimidation and harassment.
“Mr Pennings had applied to the court to have the case struck out. He also asked the court to lift the injunction against him which prevents him from threatening our contractors and employees. Justice Brown rejected both applications and the injunction remains in place.
“Pennings has been either wholly unsuccessful or largely unsuccessful at every stage of the civil legal proceedings since they began. The matter is expected to go to trial in 2025.”
