James Hird's last stand: Bombers coach to continue appeal of ASADA ruling over club's controversial supplements program

• Bombers coach James Hird is in federal court to appeal ASADA ruling over club's supplement program 
• Hird's battle to discredit the authority will focus on the extent and limit of its powers
• Hird's legal team says it will be relying on the legislation that was relevant to ASADA in July last year, which has since been updated
• In September a judge ruled that ASADA acted lawfully by conducting a joint investigation with the AFL

By Amy Ziniak for Daily Mail Australia and Australian Associated Press

Published: 20:17 EST, 9 November 2014 | Updated: 06:57 EST, 10 November 2014

Bombers coach James Hird will continue his appeal against ASADA on Tuesday after arguing in court that the anti-doping unlawfully used the AFL to escape the limits of its own powers in probing the club's controversial supplements program.

With his wife Tania, by his side in Melbourne's federal court on Monday, Hird is seeking to discredit ASADA's joint investigation with the AFL for a second time after a judge found the probe to be legal in September.

Hird's barrister Peter Hanks QC said, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) had illegally recruited the AFL to force Essendon players to answer questions. 

Tania Hird (pictured), wife of Essendon coach James Hird, walks out for the lunch break at the Federal Court in Melbourne for his appeal against ASADA

Breaking for lunch : Tania Hird (pictured) steps out for a bite to eat after being in court to support her husband, Bomber coah James Hird, in his appeal against ASADA's ruling

Wife Tania (pictured) was arriving at court on Monday to support her husband, who is challenging ASADA

Essendon AFL coach James Hird (pictured left) arrives at the Federal Court in Melboure. He is appealing against the court ruling that ASADA's Essendon supplements program investigation was lawful

Bombers coach James Hird (pictured left) has the support of his wife Tania (pictured right) when he went to court Monday to appeal against the court's decision to uphold the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority's joint doping probe with the AFL

He told the full bench of the Federal Court there was no doubt ASADA could ask questions and request documents, but it had no powers to compel those being questioned to answer or deliver the documents.

Essendon players and staff are forced to answer questions put to them by the AFL or face penalties under the contracts they sign with the league.

'The AFL's presence was plainly desired by ASADA in order to provide the compulsion,' Mr Hanks said.

'By having the AFL present the gate was opened to that disclosure.

'It's to circumvent, to walk around the limits on its power.

'It was very convenient and efficient but it was unlawful.' 

Tania Hird (pictured), wife of Essendon coach James Hird, walks out for the lunch break at the Federal Court in Melbourne, Monday

Jame Hird's (pictured left) barrister Peter Hanks QC (pictured right) said the appeal would focus squarely on what ASADA was empowered to do

Essendon coach James Hird's (pictured left) battle to discredit ASADA's investigation into the club's supplements program will focus on the extent and limits of its powers. Wife Tania (pictured right) attends court to support her husband

Mr Hanks said ASADA ran the interviews, asking the bulk of the questions with the AFL 'topping and tailing' and asking its own questions at the end.

He said the legislation governing ASADA at the time of the 2013 investigation entitled it to be 'assisted by and delegate to specific individuals' but those did not include a sporting body like the AFL.

Justice John Middleton in September ruled that ASADA acted lawfully by conducting a joint investigation with the AFL into Essendon's 2012 supplements program.

After that finding, ASADA issued show cause notices to 34 current and past Essendon players.

The appeal continues.