A ruined tomato farmer — who is now claiming tens of millions of dollars in damages because of an alleged malicious prosecution against him — is facing another legal labyrinth, after his case was canned by a judge for the second time. In 2014, Michael Le, his brother Minh Canh and their lucrative family business became the centrepoint of what at the time was said to be the largest joint investigation in WA history. Numerous authorities bandied together to allege that northern suburbs enterprise was built on the back of an illegal workforce — and they then laundered the significant profits made from that exploitation. Following the dramatic raids, multi-million dollar contracts — including one with Woolworths — disappeared almost overnight. But the prosecutions that followed descended into farce, with one trial aborted, and then another collapsing following months of evidence — with the judge blaming Commonwealth prosecutors for failing to disclose 53,000 intercepted phone calls and texts to the defence. The entire prosecution was then torn to shreds by one of WA’s top judges, with then District Court Chief Judge Kevin Sleight describing prosecutors as “grossly neglectful” — and also pointing to the “considerable harm to the accused”. Through a civil case, Mr Le places that harm as high as $50 million — and has been attempting to bring a damages case to trial since lodging a writ in 2021. The office of the Commonwealth DPP, along with various federal agents and lawyers are named in the action. However, a first attempt at a statement of claim was thrown out by a Supreme Court judge in late 2021. And now, Mr Le and his lawyers have been told their second statement of claim is also so seriously deficient that it “should be disallowed in its entirety”. “The statement of claim attempts to plead multiple malicious prosecution causes of action, arising on multiple dates, against multiple defendants,” Justice Paul Tottle wrote in his recent judgement. “The plaintiff has assumed a heavy burden, which … he has been unable to discharge. “The deficiencies are fundamental and are cumulative in their effect.” They included a lack of precision in identifying the alleged role of each of the named defendants. But Justice Tottle said Mr Le and his lawyers would be given another chance to plead their case.