group of former Fortescue employees has failed to convince a...

group of former Fortescue employees has failed to convince a court to throw out evidence gathered through a search of their property, in a ruling that boosts Fortescue’s case against the former employees’ company Element Zero.Fortescue has accused Element Zero founders Michael Masterman, Bart Kolodziejczyk and Bjorn Winther-Jensen of taking intellectual property from Fortescue to advance their green-iron start-up, and Fortescue controversially used surveillance then search-and-seizure methods to gather evidence against them.The Federal Court on Friday dismissed attempts by Element Zero to have the search-and-seizure tactics ruled invalid.Element Zero co-founders Bart Kolodziejczyk and Michael Masterman. Eamon GallagherFortescue’s use of private investigators was described by Element Zero as a “massive overreach” because the surveillance reports included photographs of children and private homes, and details obtained by rifling through mail and following family members.In July, Fortescue chairman Andrew Forrest distanced himself from the use of private investigators and reports of spying on the children of the Element Zero founders, saying that the surveillance and search raids did not align with the “values” of the mining giant.Related QuotesFMGFortescue Metals Group$19.760 -1.10%1 year1 dayOct 23Jan 24Apr 24Oct 2413.50018.00022.50027.00031.500Updated: Oct 5, 2024 – 11.38am. Data is 20 mins delayed.View FMG related articles But Friday’s ruling means evidence seized during the searches that followed the surveillance campaign may be admissible in court when the matter goes to trial.Fortescue can also order Element Zero to pay costs.Federal court judge Brigitte Markovic’s reasons for judgment will not be published until next week.Element Zero is developing a low-carbon method for turning iron ore into higher value green iron.All three of the Element Zero founders previously worked in Fortescue’s clean energy division, with Dr Kolodziejczyk and Dr Winther-Jensen involved in the scientific work to develop green-iron manufacturing methods.Dr Kolodziejczyk has insisted Element Zero’s manufacturing methods were developed after he left Fortescue, but the miner believes important information was taken from its laboratories.“Fortescue remains committed to protecting its intellectual property and investment in green technologies, and looks forward to progressing the matter to a final trial,” a Fortescue spokesman said on Friday.A spokesman for Element Zero said the company still believed Fortescue had over-reacted by ordering the surveillance.“Element Zero will review the judgment before determining whether to appeal today’s decision. Element Zero continues to believe Fortescue’s legal action is unnecessary and entirely without merit, and looks forward to the matter going to trial,” he said.Separately, Fortescue has told shareholders Dr Forrest will cast his substantial vote in favour of his re-election – and that of other incumbent directors – if investors vote to spill the miner’s board next month.Fortescue suffered a “first strike” against its remuneration plan at last year’s shareholder meeting and Dr Forrest’s board will face a spill motion if more than 25 per cent of the share register vote against the company’s remuneration report at this year’s meeting on November 6.Dr Forrest and Nicola Forrest control just over 36 per cent of Fortescue through their family office Tattarang and several other private companies, but have abstained from voting that stake on remuneration resolutions at Fortescue annual meetings because of Dr Forrest’s role as chairman.However, Fortescue told the ASX on Friday that the Forrests would cast their votes if the board were spilled and forced to stand for re-election.