Where to for Super Rugby?

[FiveStarStu]

At least the players have some clarity, limbo finished

Oh we're just getting started.

If they get leave to go to the High Court, they might not be able to hear it until next year, given how many of our parliamentarians are secret foreigners.

 

[Derpus]

Is that injunction over too, or does that persist throughout any and/or all higher courts?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Injunction might be extended if they appeal and reapply

 

[Killer]

I would think more likely another case via WA supreme court?
Why not both at the same time?

 

[Derpus]

They won't get leave to appeal again though.

 

[BLR]

They won't get leave to appeal again though.

On the same case perhaps...

 

[Derpus]

I would think more likely another case via WA supreme court?

For what? some kind of tort?

 

[Braveheart81]

Oh we're just getting started.

If they get leave to go to the High Court, they might not be able to hear it until next year, given how many of our parliamentarians are secret foreigners.

NSW Court of Appeal is the next step if they want to challenge this decision.

I would think more likely another case via WA supreme court?

That may be possible but it would be unrelated to getting their licence cancelled. They could launch a case for damages or something though.

 

[BLR]

BTW Melbourne, you're welcome for developing all these players for you. Rob Clarke was a masterstoke for you.

 

[Derpus]

NSW Court of Appeal is the next step if they want to challenge this decision.




That may be possible but it would be unrelated to getting their licence cancelled. They could launch a case for damages or something though.

Damages are a remedy not a cause of action. Struggle to see what they could sue them for. Maybe promisory estoppel. I think it's a pointless dead end though.

 

[Killer]

For what? some kind of tort?

I don't know, TF has a presser lined for straight after this judgement.

 

[Derpus]

Force, and rugby in WA, are fucking rooted. Damnit.

 

[fatprop]

Oh we're just getting started.

If they get leave to go to the High Court, they might not be able to hear it until next year, given how many of our parliamentarians are secret foreigners.

But on what grounds?

The question has been did the ARU have the right to cut them

RugbyWA had argued the ARU had no power to axe the Force because the governing body signed an “alliance” deal guaranteeing the franchise’s future until the end of the broadcast deal in 2020.
But the ARU successfully argued in arbitration that the deal no longer stood because the TV rights have since been renegotiated to accommodate for a reduced 15-team competition.

 

[Killer]

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/59acd9a4e4b074a7c6e1861f

 

[swingpass]

the Force went to arbitration, and lost. They sought leave to appeal the decision (on the right of the ARU to terminate the alliance), won the right to appeal, but have now lost that appeal, so the right to terminate the licence decision stands. Any other actions, although related, are going to be separate. Braveheart wasn't this action in the NSW Court of Appeal ?

 

[Derpus]

If only the ARU had expended the energy and resources on being half decent rather than cutting a team. Probably have the best fucking competition this side of the milky way.

 

[Derpus]

the Force went to arbitration, and lost. They sought leave to appeal the decision (on the right of the ARU to terminate the alliance), won the right to appeal, but have now lost that appeal, so the right to terminate the licence decision stands. Any other actions, although related, are going to be separate. Braveheart wasn't this action in the NSW Court of Appeal ?

In the Supreme Court of NSW.

 

[FiveStarStu]

But on what grounds?



The question has been did the ARU have the right to cut them

Don't get me wrong, I don't think they have a chance after reading that decision. The alliance agreement, for all the talk around it this year, seems pretty straightforward.

Doesn't mean it's not possible.

 

[swingpass]

In the Supreme Court of NSW.

OK so can the Appelant court hear a further appeal ? having just read the judgement it seems unlikely to succeed.

 

[Derpus]

Seems the contract was ended after the broadcast deal was renegotiated.

Term means the period commencing on the Commencement Date and ending on the expiry date of the last of the SANZAR Broadcast Agreements (being 31 December 2020) or, subject to clause 2.4, if the last of the SANZAR Broadcast Agreements is terminated or renegotiated earlier as a result of the renegotiation of the commercial terms of a broadcast arrangement, such earlier date.

Clause 2.4 gave the Force the mechanism to renegotiate the terms of the contract and i suppose they didn't.

See also p58:

"It is impermissible to have recourse to background circumstances in an endeavour to ascertain what parties, acting commercially sensibly, could or should have agreed, but did not agree.

 

[Derpus]

OK so can the Appelant court hear a further appeal ? having just read the judgement it seems unlikely to succeed.

Judgment seems pretty straightforward, they may not grant leave. Mebe tho. Twiggy is litigious as all hell.