Judge Dismisses Woodside Action Against ‘Environmental Defenders’

Just over three years ago, on 1 June 2023, Kristen Morrissey, Joana Partyka and Emil Davey, styling themselves as ‘environmental defenders’, carried out an action at Woodside Energy’s corporate headquarters in Perth. Ms Morrissey released stench gas in the office lobby, causing the building to be evacuated.

A full police investigation was conducted, and each of the three was criminally charged and convicted for their involvement in the incident.

On 2 July 2025, the District Court of Western Australia sentenced all three as co-accused after they entered pleas of guilty to the charges against them. Ms Partyka and Mr Davey each pled guilty to a single offence.

Ms Morrissey (L) and Ms Partyka

Ms Morrissey and Ms Partyka received suspended sentences of imprisonment and Mr Davey received a community-based order.

In July 2023, Woodside wrote to the three defenders seeking any documents that identified or contained a description of other persons involved in the planning, preparation or execution of the incident. Woodside threatened civil proceedings against them if they did not comply with Woodside’s request.

On 21 December 2023, Woodside commenced civil action against the three in the Supreme Court of WA, seeking preliminary discovery of materials against each of them.

The civil actions were paused while the criminal proceedings were on foot.

Over a year after the criminal cases were finished, on 16 July 2026, the preliminary discovery application was heard in the Supreme Court by Justice Matthew Howard.

Woodside’s lawyers had indicated that the discovery application was intended to inform Woodside of any other person involved in the incident so that it may commence civil litigation against everyone involved for ‘unlawful means conspiracy’.

Unlawful means conspiracy involves: (1) two or more people making an agreement to engage in unlawful conduct (2) the purpose of the conduct is to injure the plaintiff, (3) the agreement being carried out and the unlawful acts being committed, and (4) the unlawful acts causing damage to the plaintiff.

Today, 23 July 2026, Justice Howard dismissed Woodside’s application for preliminary discovery. In his judgment, the Judge said that –

“The plaintiffs [Woodside] have clearly devoted very considerable resources to their application. That is evidently the case from the volume of affidavit material put before the Court; the written submissions filed (including reply submissions); and the briefing of senior counsel. Notwithstanding that, the evidence put before the Court does not give rise to the necessary appearance of another person or persons being involved in the Incident”.

The judge observed that “Separately, from the material put before the Court, there did appear to be a tendency on the part of the plaintiffs to conflate the Incident with the broader activities of the Disrupt Burrup Hub group…”

He then added that “The apparent conflation in places may lead to an inference that this application is part of Woodside’s broader response to discourage protests against its Projects.”

Julia Grix, Executive Director of Climate Defenders Australia who acted for Ms Partyka and Mr Davey, said after the decision that her organisation “are proud to have defended Jo [Partyka] and Emil [Davey] against these cases brought by Woodside. These David and Goliath-like battles are precisely what our firm was set up to do”, and added that –

“It is disappointing that Woodside continued to pursue these matters, even though there had already been a full police investigation and the criminal cases were finalised over a year ago. Our clients’ position was vindicated by today’s outcome”

Ms Grix noted that her organisation “are ready to meet whatever comes next if Woodside continues to pursue legal processes to further punish our clients. But we hope that after today our clients will be left alone by Woodside.

“This case should be a warning to powerful actors and corporations that the law should not be used to intimidate climate defenders.”

Last week, Greenpeace called the ongoing litigation a SLAPP suit – that is, a ‘Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation’ – a legal tactic used by powerful entities to silence critics by burdening them with the high costs of legal defence.

After today’s dismissal decision, David Ritter, CEO at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Greenpeace welcomes the news that this case has been dismissed. Woodside’s use of a SLAPP* suit of this kind is a grotesque attempt to use legal tactics to silence people. There should be no place for SLAPP suits in Australian democracy.

“Community opposition to Woodside’s dangerous plans to drill over 50 gas wells at Scott Reef is large and growing.

“Woodside’s plan to drill for gas at Scott Reef is breaking hearts in the Australian community. Their plan to drill for gas at the pristine, magnificent Scott Reef, risking precious marine wildlife like turtles and whales, oceans and the climate, is a disaster waiting to happen, and one that over half a million Australians are calling on the WA and Federal governments to stop.”

*By Michael Barker, Editor, Fremantle Shipping News

~ If you’d like to COMMENT on this or any of our stories, don’t hesitate to email our Editor.

~ WHILE YOU’RE HERE –