Veteran journalist Robert Ovadia will argue his conduct prior to his sacking by the Seven Network did not amount to sexual harassment and serious misconduct, court documents filed in the Federal Court reveal.

Mr Ovadia has launched a civil case against his former employer alleging the termination of his employment in late June was unlawful, claiming there were contraventions of the Fair Work Act and breaches of contract.

He denies allegations of any inappropriate behaviour, and yesterday rejected as "baseless" a suggestion made in court that 13 additional women have come forward with complaints about his conduct since he left the network.

'Conduct of applicant did not amount to sexual harassment', statement claims

In court documents, Mr Ovadia's lawyers set out a timeline of events after he informed Editor-in-Chief Anthony De Ceglie in late May of a "rumour" of an investigation by "a third party" into the culture of Seven.

In early June, Mr Ovadia was informed he was the subject of a confidential investigation and it was suggested he take annual leave while that occurred. He said he should not be required to.

In mid-June, Seven issued a show cause letter.

Mr Ovadia's statement of claim outlines the conduct in question as being the sending of "edited photos" and "caricatures" of an unnamed person, "Person A", and edited photos of himself.

"The conduct of the Applicant did not amount to sexual harassment," it says.

The conduct was not "of a sexual nature" and the photos were not objected to by "Person A" at the time, according to the statement of claim, nor unwelcomed, offensive, humiliating or intimidating to that person.

The court documents say the conduct subject to investigation also included "the sending of a photo of a flaccid penis (obtained from the internet)" to another person, "Person B".

The statement of claim denies that conduct was "of a sexual nature", and says it was not offensive, humiliating, nor intimidating to Person B, who "made no complaint".

"The conduct of the Applicant did not amount to serious misconduct," it states.

"No reasonable employer could have formed the view that the conduct of (Mr Ovadia) amounted to sexual harassment and serious misconduct."

Dismissal done to 'attract media attention', lawyers claim

Mr Ovadia's lawyers claim Seven was determined to dismiss him "for a reason that would attract media attention", and for one which would "damage the reputation and good standing" of the journalist.

It describes the show cause process as "a farce", claiming Seven "had already determined to dismiss (Mr Ovadia)".

Mr Ovadia's statement of claim also suggests statements made by Seven to the media that Mr Ovadia had been "stood down" and was being investigated were "calculated to demean, offend and injure".

It alleges the statements were intended to "undermine the reputation" of their client, and were made in knowledge he was on annual leave and the investigation was confidential.

Yesterday, Justice Elizabeth Raper ordered the parties to attend mediation at some time in October.

Seven is yet to file its defence material, which is due to occur by mid-September.