Derpus
George Gregan (70)
It might be relevant to an argument about a point of law. Doesn't seem like it though.
Where to for Super Rugby?
- Thread starter Quick Hands
- Start date
- Status
It might be relevant to an argument about a point of law. Doesn't seem like it though.
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
yeah, in reading shtina tina comments again on TWF, it seems it is about the definition of terms in the alliance agreement. The no of teams is not directly relevant juts the "at least"
fyi, another interesting comment by the judge was(from STT) about vagueness.
Justice Hammerschlag - Did anyone argue this as invalid due to vagueness? Re: the alliance agreement clause 2 and its extras.
ARU tying to define the "negotiation" and "termination" meanings of the alliance agreement.
More so it was in favour of the Force & that the ARU were vague in the alliance agreement clauses
Negotiation a consensual agreement from the parties. Termination at the others will. Judge is trying to figure out the meanings & how the arbitrator got to their decision, which were vaguely defined and didn't have the evidence of how the conclusions were reached.
The Judge is discussing the terms terminated & its finality & negotiated & the clause it's in the alliance agreemen
ARU has 6 volumes of stuff. Keep getting he judge to change to different volumes...think of all the trees!
In the agreements there's reference to "at least" in reference to numbers of teams, games etc. the Judge keeps bringing this up ( in a good way in relation to the Force)
In the agreements there's reference to "at least" in reference to numbers of teams, games etc. the Judge keeps bringing this up ( in a good way in relation to the Force)
ACT Crusader
Jim Lenehan (48)
It's not an appeal though. This is a first instance case where it appears from reports that WARU will argue that the ARU acted outside the terms of the agreement and therefore breached that agreement. What utility WARU is seeking is the most intriguing aspect.
Derpus
George Gregan (70)
It is an appeal. Arbitration is a legally binding process where a qualified arbitrater is, by agreement from both parties, appointed to determine the matter.
If a party thinks the arbitrater erred in his or her application of the law then they can apply to the relevant court to appeal. If they are granted the right to appeal then the matter is heard.
The appeal has to relate to something in the arbitrators determination, generally speaking the incorrect application of a law.
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
That's pretty much what I thought (but wouldn't it be fun watching Clyne, Pulver & Co. squirming on the hook they made for themselves?), so do we know the actual point(s) of law on which today's judge thinks they have the right to be heard?
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
no but there is this link from tina from the SMH which seems to explain the issue.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...xe-them-from-super-rugby-20170823-gy23qb.html
ACT Crusader
Jim Lenehan (48)
Derpus, what is the law that WARU are alleging the private arbitrator misapplied?
Derpus
George Gregan (70)
I don't know, i'm supposed to be working at the moment so i didn't get to attend court this arvo
Spieber
Bob Loudon (25)
TF is a little different to Tinkler/Palmer - his shareholding in FMG AU is worth over A$6bn (and company is trading on a low 7x PE multiple - BHP 19x, Rio 15x). Twiggy will shortly received a dividend cheque for over A$250mn.
jimmydubs
Dave Cowper (27)
Just on timing. He heard them today and will ponder and return his verdict, probably next week.
Seems judge doesn't mess around though, granted leave then heard it same day - but that might be common, only had a couple visits to court and not on the scale
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
^^^^^^^ I thought today was about establishing whether RWA had grounds for appeal rather than being an actual appeal?
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
That took about 13 minutes.
Judge didn't want to faff around with a 48-72 hour timeline
Derpus
George Gregan (70)
It was, Judge obviously expedited. Booking a judge is a massive hassle. If hes got time and the parties agree it can just get done.
B
BLR
Guest
So what's the deal with the Judge not being able to find the reasoning behind the arbitrations decision?
Seems to be quite strange to me there isn't a formal explanation on hand.
Seems to be quite strange to me there isn't a formal explanation on hand.
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
yeah it was pre arranged that if the appeal ap got up it would be heard directly after. This from some article last week.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
At the moment I am trying to decide which is depressing me more?
The ARU or the NBN?
The NBN is ahead, but only marginally.
However, according to my ISP, the problem has been with Telstra who is about to install a whole bunch of new parts in the exchange. One of them is some kind of circuit board thingo. Like a brain sort of thing. You know, like a thing that has to think and decide where to send everything.
Unfortunately, there are no parts that can be replaced in the ARU to fix the problem. No circuit boards. No new intelligent gadget that makes clever decisions.
Sigh. My first world problems are killing me here. I need a lie-down.
The ARU or the NBN?
The NBN is ahead, but only marginally.
However, according to my ISP, the problem has been with Telstra who is about to install a whole bunch of new parts in the exchange. One of them is some kind of circuit board thingo. Like a brain sort of thing. You know, like a thing that has to think and decide where to send everything.
Unfortunately, there are no parts that can be replaced in the ARU to fix the problem. No circuit boards. No new intelligent gadget that makes clever decisions.
Sigh. My first world problems are killing me here. I need a lie-down.
B
BLR
Guest
From what I understand if the appeal is won by RugbyWA the entire ARU board will resign.
We can rebuild and learn from the mistakes. Rip out them copper wiring and lay the newest of fibre optics straight to the premises!
- Status