I reckon his name gets brought up here every year at trade time 
1 Like
More from the cooker
Warren Tredrea loses court bid to avoid paying Nine Network legal costs in alleged wrongful dismissal fight
Warren Tredrea’s long-running legal battle with Nine has ended with the former AFL star in significant debt. Read the letter three judges called “incomprehensible”.
Warren Tredrea stated, in his court documents, “I am not dead” – but on Friday, a court ruled his “incomprehensible and legally meaningless” bid to off-set his $149,000 debt to the Nine Network most certainly was.
In a unanimous judgment, the Full Court of the Federal Court ordered Tredrea pay all of Nine’s costs, bringing to an end the long-running, Covid-fuelled stoush between the former commercial partners.
In its judgment, the court said many of Tredrea’s arguments were “confusing and pseudo-legalistic” and his purported IOU “a waste of time” that is “strongly to be discouraged”.
His court documents, it said, contained “various elaborate but legally meaningless expressions” and “obvious and unnecessary” statements including “I am not dead”.
It said those papers “often” used “double and triple negatives to introduce what are really wrong legal arguments”.
Tredrea did not appear in court in person for the judgment, instead dialling in by video link.
He appeared to shake his head as the decision was handed down.
Previously, Tredrea was ordered to reimburse Nine’s legal costs incurred by his attempt to resurrect his failed wrongful dismissal lawsuit.
In court papers filed in June, Tredrea insisted he had covered that debt with a legal IOU because Australia has no “gold or silver coins” in circulation.
In those documents, he also claimed he is “not an entity” nor a “legal person, citizen or resident” but a “private man” whose “yes be yes” and “no be no”.
Tredrea has publicly and repeatedly denied any suggestion he is a sovereign citizen.
In their 23-page judgment, Justices Melissa Perry, Timothy McEvoy and Stephen McDonald said that, in April 2025, Nine offered to settle the dispute.
They said Nine was willing to accept $126,000 from Tredrea but, instead of a “direct response”, received an affidavit and accompanying materials.
Those materials featured “several handwritten annotations in blue and red pen, initialled by Tredrea” and legal IOU – called a promissory note – for $140,000.
When Nine’s lawyers rejected the note, calling it “misconceived”, Tredrea sent it again to managing director Sean O’Brien.
Warren Tredrea’s “promissory note”
[quote]Time Sensitive Document
Estoppel Conditions Apply Upon Default
Warren Tredrea (“we” or “us”)
Maker
[address]
Contact; [mobile number]
My Ref: WT000126052025
8 May 2025
Sean O’Brien
Managing Director
Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880), and
Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) (Collectively ‘You’ and ‘Your’)
[street and postal addresses]
Within the universal maxim of law ‘notice to agent is notice to principal and
notice to principal is notice to agent’. All addressed parties Jointly and Severally as well as their Successors, Nominees and assigns.
Notice of Payment and Notice and Demand to Verify Claim
Re: Delivery of payment instrument promissory note numbered
“PNWT260520251035”, as payment to discharge the liability to pay the debts
against Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) account on behalf of Warren Tredrea.
Dear Sean,
We deliver in “good faith’ payment by way of Promissory Note – Numbered “PNWT260520251035”, in satisfaction against the alleged outstanding balance of Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) account disclosed above. The Promissory Note is tendered in good faith in order to satisfy the principle of “honour in, honour out” and “clean hands”.
Should there be any verifiable defect/s or deficiency/ies in the attached Promissory Note, please contact us in writing so we are afforded a remedy with which to rectify it. In doing so, of course we expect that you would notify us of the specific defect/s or deficiency/ies within our delivered Promissory Note by way of your/testifier’s signed and sworn or affirmed affidavit with supporting evidence validating your/claimant’s claim.
If it is claimed and validated our delivered Promissory Note is insufficient-deficient or defective in discharging or otherwise satisfying the liability to pay the alleged debt, we direct you to return the Promissory Note to the maker (us) within three (3) days of the date of receiving it with your/complainant’s accompanying signed Notice of Dishonour and evidence supporting the claim to deficiency or defectiveness of the Promissory Note. It is our understanding a Promissory Note is as good as cash and must be treated as such.
Alternatively if the Promissory Note (“the note”), is not returned to us or presented to the maker (us) at the time, date and place stipulated on the Promissory Note, it shall be deemed by all parties in this matter that Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) have accepted the note in full and final satisfaction or discharge of the maker’s liability to pay the alleged debt.
Should Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880), via its employees or agents, not return the note to maker as stated above yet make any unsubstantiated claim as to their deficiency or defectiveness, or pursue collections against us or our estate subsequent to taking delivery of the Promissory Note, it shall be deemed by all parties to the not negotiable contract that Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) – defaulter has committed a commercial default of the contract, thereby invoking the defaultee’s rights to recover their award for breach of contract, as so expressed within the “Default & Liability Clause & Notice” within the not negotiable Contract.
We bring to your attention we have the means with which to track and trace the unique CUSIP number of the Promissory Note and to identify the overseas purchaser of the Note.
We direct all proceeds of the securitization of our delivered Promissory Note to be applied to discharge the alleged debt to Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) and any remaining proceeds surplus to discharging the aforesaid liabilities thereafter may be disbursed in favour of Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) at its sole discretion.
Finally, thereafter we seek and direct Channel 9 South Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 007 577 880) to deliver to us written confirmation the current account balance as “zero” and the account “closed”.
Thank-you in anticipation of your honourable, timely, amicable and professional services in this matter.
Kind Regards
By [signature]
Administrator and Executor for estate
“Warren Tredrea”. All rights reserved, [/quote]
“We will not attempt to describe the annotations exhaustively,” the court says in its judgment.
“But we note that they include the words ‘Accepted as Indorsed’ in red pen, initialled by Mr Tredrea in blue pen.
“Various other annotations appear in blue pen and are initialled by Mr Tredrea.”
It says it “is not necessary to set out the terms and text” of Mr Tredrea’s other materials.
“Those two pages are written in a style, and using language, that is evidently designed to appear highly technical and legalistic,” it says.
“They are in reality incomprehensible and legally meaningless, but it is evident that they purport to constitute terms of a contract.”
It says Tredrea’s note gave Nine 72 hours to respond and, if it did not, it would have “accepted it in full and final satisfaction of the alleged debt”.
Nine again refused the note, triggering June’s court hearing.
Justices Perry, McEvoy and McDonald unanimously agreed Tredrea’s promissory note “did not discharge the debt arising from the costs order” of the failed appeal.
“The quasi-legalistic language that appears in those two documents does not achieve anything, apart from making the documents difficult to understand,” the court said.
“The creation and use of documents of this kind is a waste of time, and is strongly to be discouraged.”
It said Tredrea’s “assumptions” about Federal law, underpinning his belief in the promissory note, were “wrong” – as was his description of himself as a “banker”.
“(Tredrea) asserted he ‘is an incorporated or unincorporated body of persons involved in the business of banking’,” it said.
“This does not reflect the terms of the definition of ‘Banker’ in (Federal law), which actually refers to a body of persons ‘who carry on the business of banking’.
“Mr Tredrea is not a body of persons.”
Tredrea’s assertion the IOU was secured against his birth certificate, it said, “misapprehend the nature of a birth certificate and the meaning of a security, a financial instrument and a financial institution”.
His assertions about other matters, including Australian currency, had already been dealt with and disproved in earlier, separate, unrelated court cases, it said.
“All of the submissions relied on by Tredrea are misconceived,” it said.
Nine had quoted its legal costs of the appeal at $149, 210.70 which the court found “surprisingly high”, and fixed the amount payable at $149,000.
7 Likes
Where’s Sam Lane? We’ve found an example of a very non-legal case.
6 Likes
More reasons why Butters should jump ship now.
Andy Collins has left the Hawks to take up the newly created Director of coaching role at Port.
Very decent get as he’s a good operator IMO
2 Likes
I think they misquoted her
She meant roll, not role
Dew back at Port as assistant
1 Like
Did we ■■■■ up or are Port going further down the ■■■■ shute.
As much as I can’t stand the scumbags, Port have made a clear and conscious decision to turn over their staff and have replaced about half a dozen so components of their setup. Whether it works or not is another matter but they have attracted some talent
4 Likes
Cooker has been cooked.
5 Likes
Things go from bad to worse for Tredders. I thought he had been punted from the board months ago, but no that was him being punted from Ch 9.
Memo to Tredders: Quit while you are behind.
What took Port so long?
1 Like
Being a Sovcit and all that they probably wanted to make sure they had things covered to avoid any further litigation.
Believe it or not that are plenty of people who whilst not supporting him believe he was dismissed wrongfully
1 Like
Has Murphy gone to Port 
From C9 this morning
“ Jason Horne-Francis has undergone scans on his left foot…the same foot he had surgery back in July”
He tells me he “went to take off and heard a pop in my foot” but says it “didn’t feel like the plate or bone.”
They’re the kind of team where if only a couple of things go wrong (like this potentially) they could well be legit horrible next year. Like bottom 2 or 3.
They make some odd list decisions.
2 Likes
They always seem to pick up an eclectic mix of recruits. Some real off-broadway types, journeymen and middle of the road players who won’t take them anywhere. I wasn’t surprised they were after Fiorini too!
1 Like
They are trialing Jayden Stephenson for a spot 
3 Likes