Essendon has failed in its attempt to have an injunction placed on the ASADA investigation
Furthermore, players have been told in court that the 14-day period they were offered to respond to show cause notices delivered by ASADA will stand by Justice John Middleton of the Victorian Court.
With suspended Essendon coach James Hird, chairman Paul Little and ASADA CEO Ben McNevitt all in attendance, it was always going to be more than just a normal day in court.
The Bombers players were given show cause notices by the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority a fortnight ago, and today Justice Middleton said there was no reason for an interim order against the players’ show cause notices to be given.
The burden of proof, as outlined by the Justice, was on Essendon’s counsel to show that action should be taken against ASADA before the trial, which has been set to run for three days on August 11.
Justice Middleton also said that the 14 days notice for the players to respond was enough, after the counsel for ASADA earlier argued that only 10 days were required for a show cause notice under the act. ASADA’s counsel argued that the offer extended to the players by the CEO Ben McDevitt was “generous… fair and reasonable”.
He went on to say that “the players themselves are content with the accommodation extended by the CEO [of ASADA].”
They argued that the process would be best served without judicial, interference, a point with which the Justice clearly agreed.
Players have the chance to look at alternative options before the trial date if they see fit, but the justice hopes that is not necessary.
Essendon and ASADA’s trial over the legality of the joint AFL/ASADA investigation will occur from August 11 for three days.
Justice Middleton also expressed concerns about the players not being involved with the case at this point.
While Essendon’s counsel said that the players were fully aware of the proceedings taken by the club, the did not want to be involved with the other parties in the case. Essendon did, however, leave the door open for representatives of players to be involved before the August 11 date if they wished to do so.
Paul Little later released the following statement:
“We welcome today’s decision fixing an early trial date.
“The case raises important issues and today represents a small but significant step towards bringing these matters to a close for our players and their families.
“Today, the court did not make an interim order that would stay the operation of the show causes notices until the hearing of the case, but instead accepted that the club was sufficiently protected by an undertaking from ASADA to give the club and the players 14 days notice before taking any action on the notices.
“The judge made clear that the court would be very disappointed if ASADA took any further action to upset the status quo before trial.
“The court also asked all parties to give further consideration as to whether the players should be joined as necessary respondents.
“We look forward to being able to present our case on 11 August and the opportunity to bring matters to a close for our players and their families as soon as possible.”
Philip
Guest
That is totally wrong. The judge joked that he was giving Essendon more problems than ASADA. He told ASADA to take it as a hint that he would not be happy if they proceeded against Ess players before trial. Tom Howe QC for ASADA accepted the hint and ASADA undertook to leave the status quo as it is. First score Essendon. Justice Middleton also told Essendon's lawyers they would get their hands on the information they sought. Second score Essendon. He also wanted to explore ways the players could appear anonymously. No win for ASADA there as their tactic was to try and forcibly join the players to case and cause conflict between them and the club. Didn't succeed. James Hird has subpoened Brett Clothier. It was to keep Clothier from the witness box that the AFL withdrew charges against Bruce Reid last year. Essendon look pretty comfortable at this point.
Craig
Guest
They got what they wanted, Essendon did.
Craig
Guest
The purpose of Essendon's sought injunction was to prevent ASADA proceeding against players before the trial on August 11. They didn't get the injunction but they got what they wanted anyway. ASADA will not move on the players before the trial. That's a win for The Bombers. Judging by the words of Justice Middleton they will also get the information they want. Frankly, however the media wants to spin it, it was a good morning in court for Essendon Football Club.
Anthony
Guest
The purpose of Essendon's sought injunction was to prevent ASADA proceeding against players before the trial on August 11. They didn't get the injunction but they got what they wanted anyway. ASADA will not move on the players before the trial. That's a win for The Bombers. Judging by the words of Justice Middleton they will also get the information they want. Frankly, however the media wants to spin it, it was a good morning in court for Essendon Football Club.
Stephen
Guest
If players are suspended, but still being paid, how can you get supplementary players in to fill the void without going over the salary cap?
Stephen
Guest
I agree Macca. Essendon and Hird didn't just have lawyers looking after their interests. They had the Creme de la Creme. The head honchos. The best money can buy. Which rights of Essendon's has the AFL sold down the river? Truth is that it is in the AFL's to limit damage to Essendon and protect one of their biggest drawcards/money earners.
Andy_Roo
Roar Guru
Dave, from a draft and recruiting perspective ninth is the worst place to finish, so I think they were punished to the limit in that sense.
dave
Guest
I put 20 bob on ESS for wooden spoon at 50/1 as soon as i heard about the suspected drug use. Thats a 1thou return but the ESS lawyers and AFL somehow decided they lose premiership points and stil finish 9th. What about all the teams below 9th that didnt take drugs? The TAB and the AFL would have taken a belting If The Bombers were rightly punished. That was last year .I dont expect it to be any different this year
mattyb
Guest
Thank goodness only one person is actually supporting dissension on here.Loyalty is a very good thing but anyone supporting essendon,hird or little is a disgrace to mankind.And yes dank should take a lot of the blame but he is hirds mate and hird knew exactly what was going on because he had dank giving him these drugs as well.Any club doctor who questioned dank was called 'old school' and totally ignored.Hird and Little are liners who should not only loose their jobs but never employed again by anyone.Hird should actually be going to jail and so should Dank.
Tilly
Guest
Injunction thrown out, judge advises players would be better off to join the legal challenge, Hird has not yet provided a sworn statement, judge advises Essendon lawyer that he, the judge, is giving them more problems that ASADA. Judge to allow document disclosure and sharing - thus allowing for those documents to become public during the court case. What exactly have Essendon won out of this? They have succeeded in placing the players in a vice they now cannot get out of. What a dreadful mess, with only greedy lawyers winning and no one who loves our game impressed by Essendon's delay tactics.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
No. AFL has absolute discretion over team based sanctions.
Penster
Guest
Effen ey wot?
pope paul v11
Guest
Being duped will get them 6mths. The AFL will not boot Essendon and will draw players from wherever. I imagine Essendon will have to honour the contracts for the duration of the suspension. Legal action by the players against the club would be an issue but they'll still get paid, still be able to play, so doubtful they would have a case. Healthwise down the track though? Essendon maybe should increase their premium payments.
Frank R
Roar Rookie
You maybe right on who EFC seem to want to look after. Todays news is that the AFL and AFLPA have been waiting 5 months for EFC to sing off on a 5 year program to monitor the players health. If they really had the players welfare at heart they would be already doing this.
Macca
Guest
This was in the Herald sun in earlier this month "In April, Essendon chairman Paul Little said it had been a mistake to self-report, and the club “gave away all its leverage”.
Shakemyhead
Guest
If it is found that illegal substances were administered but the players are cleared as they were clearly duped by employees of the EFC, can the EFC be banned from competition under the WADA code? If so then what would happen to the contracted players of the EFC?
pope paul v11
Guest
I thought Neil Young was a bit rusty. Who is Brett Clothier and why should he be nervous?
Lazza
Guest
Fans of other clubs are just horrible RedB. As a Soccer fan I'll support you. Drag this out in the courts for as long as you can please.
Stephen
Guest
What? Those guys who fronted the Media Conference way back when, they didn't say that they were open to a full investigation? Maybe they were clones put there to fool us. If you think the AFL ever had Essendon in the gun, think of this: Why would the AFL want to see the demise of one of their biggest drawcard/money spinning teams? If anything the AFL has tried to minimize the damage. The AFL NEEDS a successful EFC. THE AFL has not been assisting to hunt your guys down, they have been trying to protect the club from the very situation it finds itself in.
Macca
Guest
And one final one from Mark Thompson in July – “Why would I start doing that now?,” he said last month. “Why would Dr Re id after being in the (game) 40 years start che ating now? It is just cr ap, that we would be a part of that. In the end, the truth will come out about everything in this saga.” Pretty self explanatory really.