THE Government is considering a public inquiry into the Liberal Party's role in bringing down former Speaker Peter Slipper through legal action which was thrown out of court.

The inquiry would be a high profile act of revenge for the Opposition's strategy of attempting to bring down the Government by highlighting allegations of corruption against Mr Slipper and former Labor MP Craig Thomson.

And it could expose the role of senior Liberals in the accusations of sexual harassment against Mr Slipper which cost him his job as Speaker, even though a court has refused to hear them.

Federal Court judge Steven Rares said in his ruling today that to continue the case would be "manifestly unfair" to Mr Slipper.

Mr Slipper said he was pleased by the decision and that he had always believed Mr Ashby's action was "about manipulating the justice system to inflict damage on my reputation and political career and to advance the interests of the Liberal National Party".



"In his judgement, Justice Rares said he had reached the firm conclusion that Mr Ashby's predominant purpose for bringing these proceedings was to pursue a political attack against me," the former Speaker said in a statement.



"I feel vindicated by today's judgement.



"The past eight months have been extremely traumatic for my wife, family and me. I thank my wife, family, staff and friends for their support during this extraordinarily difficult time."

Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said this morning the Coalition would have "some serious questions to answer about their own conduct".

The Government is expected to accuse the Coalition of assisting sexual harassment allegations against Mr Slipper for political reasons, and of attempting to turn Parliament into a kangaroo court.

The Labor counter attack is likely to take aim at Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, shadow attorney-general George Brandis, and former Coalition minister Mal Brough, who is now Liberal candidate for the Queensland seat of Fisher currently held by Mr Slipper.

"The person who now has to answer serious questions is the shadow attorney-general Senator Brandis," said Schools Minister Peter Garrett.

"He's the one that made a call on this case when he shouldn't have. He's the one who needs to answer questions now because it's clearly been an abuse of process and the court has found accordingly."

But Senator Brandis said the Opposition was studying the decision, and took his own swipe at Nicola Roxon.



"The Attorney-General has once again behaved inappropriately, and once again shown a misunderstanding of her appropriate constitutional role, in commenting on the case when it remains before the court pending the appeal," Senator Brandis said.



"The Attorney-General has also yet to explain why the Commonwealth settled its side of the proceeding in breach of the Commonwealth’s own guidelines."



This was a reference to the $50,000 paid to Mr Ashby in September to end court action against the Commonwealth on the sexual harassment matter. The Government said the payment was made to prevent a prolonged case which would cost much more money.

It is highly unlikely Mr Slipper will get his job as Speaker back, but today's court decision is a significant moral victory for him at least.

The case centred around his former adviser James Ashby who had accused him of sexual harassment providing evidence of a series of text messages between the two men, and between Mr Ashby and others.

Mr Ashby also raised claims Mr Slipper rorted his travel entitlements with bogus cab dockets. The Director of Public Prosecutions is still considering whether those claims will lead to charges.

In the Federal Court today Judge Rares ordered that the application by Mr Ashby contained "scandalous" allegations and that to continue the case would be "manifestly unfair" to Mr Slipper and that some of the claims were done to "injure" his reputation.

"Mr Ashby's predominant purpose in bringing the proceedings was not a proper one," Judge Rares said.

"A party cannot be allowed to misuse the court's process by including scandalous and damaging allegations.

"I have reached the conclusion that Mr Ashby's predominant purpose for bringing these proceedings was to pursue a political attack against Mr Slipper."

Mr Ashby, who has been ordered to pay Mr Slipper's legal costs, said today he intended to appeal the judgement and told reporters the case had been hurtful to him and his family.

"We first filed my sexual harassment claim against Mr Slipper back on April 20. That's almost eight months ago," Mr Ashby told reporters in Sydney.

"And since that date no evidence at all has been heard of my substantive complaint against the former Speaker, that he sexually harassed me.

"There has been a determined campaign to try and prevent the substantive allegations being heard and judged in open court, and to put me to the maximum cost of pursuing justice."

Attorney-General Roxon said there had been a clear finding that Mr Ashby had "abused the process of the court".

"The Commonwealth welcomes the courts decision," she said.

"This shows how dangerously wrong and misleading Senator Brandis can be in prejudging court matters. The Coalition will have some serious questions to answer about their own conduct."

The judge also said he did not accept that News Ltd journalist Steve Lewis had been referring to a hire car driver when he told Mr Ashby in a text message, "We will get him”.

The court had been told that Mr Lewis was referring the driver who allegedly was involved in Mr Slipper's rorting of taxi dockets.

"I do not accept that," said the judge.

"That is not how the text messages read. In my opinion the reference is clearly to Mr Ashby and Mr Lewis 'getting' Mr Slipper, not to Mr Lewis finding a driver."

Judge Rares also said he was "not satisfied" that Mr Lewis was looking to advance the political interests of Mr Brough or the Liberal Party by reporting on the story.

He said that "consequence does not necessarily suggest that the journalist or publisher is seeking to aid or support the side of politics that benefits from the publication".

"Rather, it is more likely that, by publishing the story, the journalist or publisher is simply fulfilling his, her or its role of reporting news", he said.

"Once presented with sources such as Mr Ashby and Ms Doane, together with the prospect of a story such as in the originating application, it is difficult to think that any journalist would have acted differently to Mr Lewis in pursuing and publishing that story."