Rinehart's row with son: 'throw him under the bus'

Hancock Prospecting's executive chair instructed John Hancock's solicitor, Robert Butcher, to issue a damning media release after he started asking questions about the company's assets in 2003, said Christopher Withers SC, representing Mrs Rinehart's two eldest children.

"Basically urging John's solicitor to throw him under the bus and publish the statement," he told the Supreme Court trial over mining assets and royalties in Western Australia on Thursday.

The media release was to be sent to The Sydney Morning Herald and The West Australian newspapers, saying Mr Hancock made false claims about Mrs Rinehart manipulating mining assets left by her father to her children.

Mr Hancock had just been interviewed by the media outlets for an article about the feud, which is currently in arbitration in the Federal Court amid claims Mrs Rinehart breached her fiduciary duties to her children and committed fraud.

"So that really, we say, speaks to the power that Gina believed that she wielded that a solicitor would do something like this and issue a statement of that kind, obviously without their consent," Mr Withers said, referring to the release Mr Butcher refused to send.

Mrs Rinehart and her lawyer were accused of lying, bullying, threatening and blackmailing Mr Hancock as he "heroically" attempted to unravel the complex web of business transactions that allegedly undid Lang Hancock's 1988 plan to leave his grandchildren 49 per cent of the family's assets.

"John knew in 2004 enough to be able to commence proceedings and make the allegations that he now makes in these proceedings," Mr Withers said referring to Mrs Rinehart's alleged financial breaches which included "destroying" a trust that held a 33 per cent share in Hancock Prospecting for the children.

"What is perhaps even more significant is the way that Gina and (Hancock Prospecting) responded to John's allegations, which, we say, was to lie to him and threaten him and his lawyer."

Mr Withers read multiple letters to back up his claim, which he said illustrated the power imbalance between Mr Hancock and his mother.

They included one from February 2005 that said he and Mr Butcher could be sued if they took legal action or spoke to the media.

"We remind your client that if he institutes a writ against Gina or any family member or any related company or director ... he will not be receiving anything from Gina ... but will be receiving extensive damages claim and legal bills," Mr Withers said reading another.

"Your client, with his present activities and demands, is on very thin ice."

The alleged threats were made as Mr Hancock struggled to pay his bills, forced to ask his mother to pay his credit card debt while he lived in a Sydney apartment paid for by Hancock Prospecting.

"He was being met with all of these different denials and threats, and ... is also in deep financial difficulties," Mr Withers said.

"He didn't have enough money to buy new brake pads for his car and service the car."

Another letter titled "crackpot claim" said any assertions that mining assets had been removed from a trust would be wrong.

"He was met at every turn with lies bullying, intimidation, designed to stop him making further inquiries," Mr Withers said.

The claims were made in a high-stakes legal stoush in Perth in which Mrs Rinehart's company and her children are defending the claims of Wright Prospecting and DFD Rhodes.

Wright Prospecting is suing for a share of some Hope Downs tenements and royalties and the family company of the late prospector Don Rhodes, DFD Rhodes, says it is entitled to 1.25 per cent royalty share.

The Hope Downs mining complex near Newman is one of Australia's largest and most successful iron ore projects.

Australian Associated Press