Injunction / Appeal hearing - Rugby vs ARU! 23.08.2017

[Darren]

Sounds like Justice Hammerschlag is reviewing the process of arbitration rather than the result of.

I guess if the process was not correct, the ruling can be overturned without having to examine the result, which could be quite a drawn out affair?

[valzc]

".......Further, commitments to RugbyWA Board Member David Vaux on Sunday afternoon by Cameron Clyne, that the ARU would accept the retention of five Australian teams provided Andrew Forrest financially underwrote the Western Force and make a significant contribution to Australian rugby........"
I cannot get my head around this one! Why on earth would Clyne have made such a statement, and then completely backflipped! Beggars belief! Did it just fall out of his gob thinking that Twiggy was just bluffing about the money? Are they seriously still underestimating Twiggy & the power support that WA is holding? This is the logic of a seriously narcissistic nutter-this is on Trump level behaviour! Very clever of Twiggy & Stooke- play to Clyne's ego, string him along, and when he's given enough rope.....

[Jules]

Seriously 4 Corners where are you? Even a report on 7.30 would be good! Surely there is enough for a good report on the crap the ARU have pulled over this!!

[Alison]

Seriously 4 Corners where are you? Even a report on 7.30 would be good! Surely there is enough for a good report on the crap the ARU have pulled over this!!

I'm trying my best Jules!

[Alison]

Sounds like Justice Hammerschlag is reviewing the process of arbitration rather than the result of.

If it's just the process, it wouldn't take a week to come up with a ruling, surely?

[BLR]

If it's just the process, it wouldn't take a week to come up with a ruling, surely?

By the sounds of it there was a lack of documentation in regards to the arbitration so I would assume he would have to try and piece what little is there together and then make a judgement.

[blueandblack]

and do his other work. He's got 5 other matters to hear tomorrow.

[chrisk]

Justice David Hammerschlag on Wednesday said he was focusing instead on whether an arbitrator had made an error of law when backing the Australian Rugby Union's decision to drop Western Force from the Super Rugby competition.

Just my thoughts.
It's interesting that the new evidence seems to be that SANZAAR didn't push for the Force to be removed, it was the ARU's decision. Did the ARU misrepresent this to Foxtel, causing them to make a decision to accept changes to the broadcasting agreement? Also, was the ARU in a position to be able to approach Foxtel to request the change to the agreement, given this was acting against the agreement with the Western Force? This is more complex than just being "dudded", by approaching Foxtel the ARU may have been acting against the contract so the discussion about the decision based on the broadcast agreement becomes invalid.
It certainly seems the ARU didn't act in good faith, by seeking to undermine the terms of the broadcasting agreement, but that might be a separate issue/day in court.

[valzc]

By the sounds of it there was a lack of documentation in regards to the arbitration so I would assume he would have to try and piece what little is there together and then make a judgement.

With 6 big volumes/tomes of files, the ARU didn't have enough documentation......?

[shasta]

Western Force and ARU at loggerheads over who promised what

WAYNE SMITH
The Australian12:00AM August 24, 2017

The Western Force and the *Australian Rugby Union, combatants in the NSW Supreme Court yesterday, were also at loggerheads over whether Perth billionaire Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest was led astray before he offered the ARU a rumoured $50 million to spare the Force.

The Australian understands that prior to Forrest meeting with ARU chairman Cameron Clyne in Adelaide on Tuesday, the ARU had proposed a solution that if Forrest provided financial backing for the Force and also made a *substantial donation to Australian rugby, it would seriously consider reversing its decision to axe the Force. “It was, in fact, more explicit than that,” said a Force representative. “They actually gave us a *figure. What Andrew was talking about was in the ballpark (of what they asked).”

But that is not how Clyne recalls events. “I had discussions with a number of people in Perth prior to the meeting with Andrew on Tuesday to articulate some of the roadblocks for considering any possibility of reversing our *decision to discontinue the Force,” Clyne said in a statement.

“There was never an undertaking given by the ARU that it would accept a particular financial offer in order to reverse its decision. That is a complete misrepresentation of what was discussed.”

The meeting at Adelaide’s Hilton hotel was barely under way before Forrest’s offer was rejected. Former Wallaby and Forrest *adviser John Welborn issued a statement after the meeting in which he said he was “stunned at the intransigence of the ARU on their position in the face an incredibly generous and expansive offer of support from Mr Forrest”.

The Force, after being granted leave to appeal against the ARU’s decision to “discontinue” them in Super Rugby, put its case to NSW the Supreme Court yesterday, *followed by the ARU.

Judge David Hammerschlag has reserved his decision until a later date, possibly the end of next week, leaving both parties to wait — their every option effectively exhausted.

Although the Force and Forrest are exploring back-up plans looking north to Asia, their future as a Super Rugby entity rests *entirely with the judge’s decision.

Similarly, the ARU has nowhere else to go if it loses the appeal. It cannot cut another club, now that the Victorian Rugby Union has secured the Melbourne Rebels’ licence. Its only course of action seemingly would be to go back to SANZAAR — its next board meeting is set for September 13 in Sydney — and try to persuade the other three voting members, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina, that they were legally prevented from delivering on their promise to contract to four teams.


It would have to be said that the ARU seems inordinately terrified of SANZAAR launching legal *action against it, particularly since Australia, as one of the joint venturers, has the power of veto.

Conversely, it has little apparent fear of the West Australian government getting any traction with its threat to sue the ARU for the $100m-plus it spent on providing rugby infrastructure. Yet WA Premier Mark McGowan made it clear when speaking on Perth’s 96FM breakfast show yesterday, that he was very much looking to pursue the state’s legal options.

“We’re doing some research currently as to what assurances were given,” McGowan said. “Was there a contract? Was there at least an oral agreement between the government and the ARU that the Force would continue? It would seem to be that there must have been because otherwise that is an enormous amount of *expenditure to engage in without assurance.”

Nor was Liberal senator Linda Reynolds backing down from her plans to call for a Senate inquiry. “If I move the motion in the Senate in a fortnight — and currently there is no reason not to move it — I’m confident of cross-party *support for an inquiry,” Senator Reynolds said.

Even if the ARU wins the court case, they lose. It is now 136 days since the ARU set the infamous 48-to-72-hour deadline, 160 days since SANZAAR voted to dump one Australian and two South African sides and 185 days since the ARU board meeting where it was voted to reduce Australia’s presence to four teams if that’s what SANZAAR wanted.

And every one of those days has crippled the code, its sponsors, its players and fans. And the mental health of the Force players and staff is becoming a concern. Forrest visited them in Perth yesterday, as did Rugby Union Players Association CEO Ross Xenos.

[shasta]

Clyne & Co have been caught out in public stating blatant lies again. In the article above he admits to discussing possibilities for reversing the decision on reducing to 4 franchises. How can this be, when their statement yesterday said it was not possible. If this weren't such a serious matter it would be hilarious. How the f@ck could this clown run one of the big 4. It just gets more unbelievable by the day.

[sittingbison]

Hoisted on his own petard the weasel. And what were Eel and Robbo doing there when "the meeting was barely under way before Forrest’s offer was rejected"

Further, I would like to know why the chairman of the board has been so pre-eminent during this fiasco. He should not have been sighted once. Why are they paying a CEO, CFO, COO etc....you know, the EXECUTIVES. Just because they have all resigned doesn't mean Patsy Clone should be on TV

[BLR]

With 6 big volumes/tomes of files, the ARU didn't have enough documentation......?

Documentation of how the arbitrators decision was arrived at.

The 6 big volumes I assume is the various SANZAAR agreements which although relevant I think they may hone down on the arbitration itself to see if an error was made.

[travelling_gerry]

Its unbelievable the actions of the ARU - with the discussions the previous day with David VAux they should have been able to sit down to lunch, say "Yup, thats a deal, call the lawyers off for tomorrow morning, Steaks and Cristal for all" and have a pleasant afternoon.

[terrycobner]

If the aru allowed the own the force share issue with prior knowledge and incriminating documents of intent to close the force, would this not constitute a serious legal case? Can anyone with legal/asic insight shed a light on this?