On Sunday, Parramatta chairman Steve Sharp promised legal action if he was not satisfied with the NRL’s handling of the club’s salary cap issues. This evening, mere hours after the NRL handed the Eels their penalty, Sharp and his four fellow stood-down officials struck their first blow in the courts.
With the NRL having announced it would deregister Sharp, deputy chairman Tom Issa, director Peter Serrao, CEO John Boulous and football manager Daniel Anderson, Supreme Court Justice Rowan Darke has this evening reinstated the five men.
According to Fairfax Media, Justice Darke “enacted interim orders temporarily preventing the NRL from restricting the functions of the directors and club officials of the Parramatta National Rugby League Club Ltd.”
Parra salary cap scandal
» Press conference: Parra breached the cap by $3 million, players may be investigated
» Parramatta docked 12 points, fined $1 million for salary cap breaches
» Don’t make the innocent pay for Parramatta rorting the salary cap
» Will the Eels take the NRL to court?
» How Parramatta’s punishment compares to previous salary cap breaches
» Read the full statement from the NRL
The five men’s barrister, Arthur Moses, SC, argued that the NRL, as a separate entity to Parramatta Rugby League Club Ltd, cannot “fetter” the Parramatta club’s directors, as to do so is in breach of the Corporations Act.
“One corporation cannot impose upon the directors of another corporation,” he said. “To state that is to state the obvious with all due respect.”
Speaking at this morning’s press conference to announce the sanctions against the club – who stand accused of total salary cap breaches to the tune of some $3 million – NRL CEO Todd Greenberg stressed that the penalties were “provisional in nature” and that “both the club and officials will be afforded an opportunity to respond”.
However, Mr Moses said that the five men were only told of the intention to deregister them at a meeting of the entire board held at 7:30am today.
“[There was] no prior notice given that they would be suspended today before today,” he said.
Furthermore, Mr Moses said the officials had been told they would be given just five days to prepare both their own and the club’s response to the proposed sanctions.
Ernie Wanka
Guest
If Whatmough is on 700k a season plus 200k TPA and is medically retired Parramatta should still be over the cap- Players contracts go from Nov 1 to Oct 31- with 6 months of the contract gone(players are paid monthly) the most the Eels could claim in reducing the 570k they need to is half of Whatmoughs 700k contract - 350k and none of the 200k TPA. Meaning they will still need to shed at least 220k of player(s). The NRL have buggered this up - it was an interim reports and sanctions - it should have been worded minimum of 12 points pending final report- with Parramatta being allowed to accumulate points as a result of the injection when the NRL brings down it's final decision sometime in June (after considering Parramatta response-legal action may extend this )all points accumulated when this occurs should be deducted not just the initial 12 only. Parramatta by June could have more than 12 comp points and if so should lose them all and or what points they have if this june deadline is exented as a result of legal action- how long will any legal action through the courts take though??- it will be a disaster for the game if this drags on until near finals time and or is not completed when the Finals start and Parramatta are in the 8 since no points will be deducted as a result of the injuction. What contingency plan does the NRL have if legal action is ongoing when the finals start and Parramatta are in the 8 - stop them from playing in the finals??
E-Meter
Guest
No to Denis Fitzgerald.
John
Guest
I wonder if the judge was paid off by TPAs/brown paper bags and if paying off the judge was discussed and documented in the minutes of the Board meeting.
pete bloor
Guest
I'm surprised there wasn't a group that has already put that in motion
pete bloor
Guest
That doesn't seem too onerous.
Parrafan
Guest
100 member signatures. However whoever is calling the EGM needs to put forth their resolution and 28 days notice needs to be given to the members.
pete bloor
Guest
Kaks you might know - can members call a general meeting to remove the board?
up in the north
Roar Rookie
Maybe the NRL are preparing the way for an extraordinary general meeting so the members, as one block, can vote for a change of leadership. Given the inept way those five clowns were caught trying to rort the system, I doubt they have fully thought through their strategy. The NRL are setting them up for a big fall and the juicy part is it's happening in real time like the death from a thousand cuts.
Richard Maybury
Guest
The Barry I suggest you re-read what you wrote here and then consider Perth 1000's of kms from the nearest NRL team and then answer your own question. "Does anyone really think it’s in the NRLs best interest to leave a key market, massive geographical area and junior nursery without a team?" When you consider that a degree of substitution would occur if the Eels were replaced, the potential gains in an entirely different geographical area could be massive.
pete bloor
Guest
Not really but if you say hey compared to Melbourne/Canterbury you got off light but a condition was this. Then you look over at the innocent members (who voted them in) with a pleading glance and suggest that if the members are happy not be playing for anything or be kicked out of the comp. What are the rules around calling an extraordinary general meeting at Parramatta?
Emcie
Roar Guru
No chance. But say that the eels board members win after months in court and the NRL is unable to punish those involved, does the NRL just roll over? If they were to deregister the eels in the off season until the board was removed I'd imagine that there would be a pretty Swift resolution, either that or the entire comp would desend into anarchy. Like I said, won't happen. I just don't understand what the current board are hoping to accomplish here
pete bloor
Guest
Unless there is a condition of their NRL licence that all board members need to be registered/approved/ratified etc with the NRL
The Barry
Roar Guru
There's no way the NRL will deregister the Eels. Does anyone really think it's in the NRLs best interest to leave a key market, massive geographical area and junior nursery without a team?
Richard Maybury
Guest
I always thought that there was the potential for the Storm saga to blow up. The way it was handled was appalling and Gallop was positively vindictive in his actions. It was only news ltd that stopped them going to court at the time.
Richard Maybury
Guest
If given the nod now, a Perth based team could be ready to take the Eels place for 2017 particularly with a whole swathe of players suddenly coming onto the market.
Emcie
Roar Guru
I didn't say they should, it's just a threat they could use. This whole thing is going to be ugly for a long time by the looks of it
Richard Maybury
Guest
Frankly, I always saw this de-registering of the directors as a bit dodgy. The way a company is run is a matter for that company's owners and them alone. Now if I was an Eels member, I would certainly want them gone.
Richard Maybury
Guest
There was a report last night that Melbourne's new owners are considering taking the NRL to court over their own sanctions in 2010. "Legal advice that the Storm would win court action against the NRL for the sanctions imposed on the club for salary cap breaches has been re-actioned after the disproportionately light penalties against Parramatta. As reported by Fairfax on Monday, a coterie of influential Storm supporters, including former club director Peter Maher, failed in an attempt to have the NRL review the 2010 penalties and will now pursue legal action, armed with advice from arguably the nation's leading barrister, Allan Myers QC."
eagleJack
Roar Guru
Listening to Greenberg they always expected this to happen from a legal point of view. It's more of a ploy to put them on notice. The 5 aren't innocent in all of this and the hope from the NRL is that everything these 5 now do are in the best interests of the club. The NRL wants the club to move forward from this. But history shows the Eels board and directors, while they may say they love the club, are only in it for themselves. They will drag this out and fight it. Rather than let the club finally move on from the poorly managed cesspit it has been for years.
81paling
Roar Rookie
If the NRL hit the Eels as hard as they could then there would be nothing to hold the Eels back from launching every legal contest they could with united support from fans, members and players bringing a fractured organisation together. They hit the Eels the morning after their AGM after investigating them since July 2015 with a sanction that gives them some but, little hope of making the finals. The NRL do not want this fractured group to unite as they may decide to challenge the autonomy of the NRL. People like Dennis Fitzgerald will do all they can to divide and ruin the club and many will support him. If this does not happen and the Eels mount a legal challenge without self imploding, it will be based on the reality that the NRL can not step in and remove a director from any Leagues club associated with an NRL franchise in the country. It is a question of jurisdiction, like with the Hopoate case in coaching a Manly district rep club in the NSWRL comp does the NRL have jurisdiction?. I hope that no matter what happens the NRL are informed by whatever court judges this that they have no right to touch my local Leagues club because when I look at the Titans, Newcastle and the Tigers I am not very impressed with the NRL's ability to have any involvement with any club. We must for the sake of the independence and health of the game encourage the Eels to at least challenge the NRL to ensure that the NRL is not being autocratic.