Victoria Cross recipient Ben Roberts-Smith is trying to stop "deeply personal" material being revealed in his defamation lawsuit over claims he committed war crimes and domestic violence.
But material which has been disclosed reveals he asked his wife, Emma, to lie and say they were separated at the time of his "affair" with another woman, the Federal Court was told on Monday.
The war hero is suing the publishers of The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Canberra Times over articles about his time serving with the special forces in Afghanistan and his personal life.
Mr Roberts-Smith says the articles contained false allegations about potential war crimes between 2009 and 2012 .
He also contends they falsely suggested he punched a woman, with whom he was said to be having an affair, in Canberra in 2018.
In a brief case management hearing in the Federal Court on Monday, his barrister Bruce McClintock SC asked that approval be given for the redaction of certain material contained in documents provided to the publishers.
The "deeply personal" material was completely irrelevant to the defamation case, he said
Lyndelle Barnett, for the publishers, said they would have some concern about whether it would be appropriate for Justice Anthony Besanko to see the redacted material to rule on it, noting he would be hearing the trial next year.
Acknowledging the "sensitivities" of the material, she suggested an order could be made allowing the defendants' legal team to have access and if truly irrelevant, the information "would not see the light of day".
Mr Roberts-Smith and his wife have previously said that his relationship with another woman was not an affair as the couple was separated at the time.
But Ms Barnett said in the material not redacted Ms Roberts-Smith describes the relationship as "an affair" and that she had been told by her husband to lie about it.
This would be highly relevant to Mr Roberts-Smith's credibility and that of his wife, if she was called to give evidence, the lawyer said.
Mr McClintock opposed any order allowing the "lawyers to hostile parties" to see the material.
"No one would wish other people to see" the highly personal material, he stressed again.
The parties will provide the judge with submissions before he considers the redaction application.
Australian Associated Press