Sorry Saga - “It’s actually quite funny people thinking they know more than they actually do”

Football Discussion The Sorry Saga
3599

Judge to decide if AFL executives will give evidence over Essendon scandal
Padraic Murphy, Herald Sun
an hour ago

THE ESSENDON supplements scandal will roll into a sixth season with a Supreme Court judge considering whether top AFL executives should give sworn evidence about the long-running saga.

Lawyer Jackson Taylor is suing AFL chiefs including Gillon McLachlan and Mike Fitzpatrick, claiming they breached consumer law by making deceptive and misleading comments during the supplements scandal.

The AFL says some of the comments relate to disciplinary proceedings brought against the players.

The case against the AFL executives largely rests on seven statements, including five media articles which reported behind-the-scenes conduct of the league’s powerbrokers.

One of the articles is a Herald Sun report in which former Essendon football manager Danny Corcoran alleges he was told by Mr Fitzpatrick that “your mate Hird will never get back into football” during a chance meeting at a property auction.

The AFL says even if true, the reported comments were opinions about the disciplinary hearings and did not break any commercial laws

Mr Taylor claims he is a dispassionate observer with no personal interest in the supplements saga, but Justice John Dixon said he didn’t understand the case alleged against the AFL executives.

“To what end? I can’t make out from the statement of claim what all this about,” Justice Dixon said.

Gregory Harris QC, for the AFL, said it was not clear why Mr Taylor had launched the proceeding.

“What, precisely, does the plaintiff want?,” Mr Harris said.

“What the plaintiff is doing is seeking to bring to court a large matter … It’s going to involve third parties”

If the matter proceeds to a full trial, it is expected to be very expensive and could involve witnesses from ASADA, the AFL and various government agencies, Mr Harris said.

If the matter proceeds to a full trial, Mr Harris said the saga could drag on to at least 2020.

Justice Dixon — who described the AFL as a “juggernaut” — is considering the merits of the case and what form of trial should be held if it proceeds.

He reserved his decision.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/judge-to-decide-if-afl-executives-will-give-evidence-over-essendon-scandal/news-story/4cfbd960b078422a92b79f88dc79e3c1

5 Likes
3600

Thanks for that

Its interesting that they dont know what he wants. How about justice, fairness, integrity, honesty, truthfullness?.

12 Likes
3601

Let’s hope the old Judge has heard about those things.

But surely Burnside QC should have answered “what he wants”. Why wasn’t that reported? Looks like the Hun has decided it wants nothing to do with fairness either.

4 Likes
3602

I liked this line.

If the matter proceeds to a full trial, Mr Harris said the saga could drag on to at least 2020…

Wouldn’t Mr Harris love to have two years work guaranteed. He could put another level on his house.

2 Likes
3603

Judge sounds a bit cautious about making government misdemeanors public.
Hope Burnside really explains importance of seaking proper justice as the current anti doping system and trials by media are an absolute joke.
This must go ahead!

10 Likes
3604

No surprise its reported as though it’s a seemingly nonsense case. I expect to see a lot more of that line of reporting given AFL media influence.

Let’s see if he’s got the spine to go against the AFL’s preferred outcome with likely government external pressure to follow suit also

Middleton certainly didn’t

5 Likes
3605

What did Bruce Francis have to say…

1 Like
3606

Has a whiff of Middleton about it. Get ready for the let down.

11 Likes
3607

Has he given up on, for example, the “pretended Essendon could still play finals so that crowds wouldn’t crater and hence cost the AFL money” argument? Or is the Hun just bullshitting when they say it’s primarily about whether Fitzpatrick said Hird is the most evil person to ever exist?

5 Likes
3608

That he described the AFL as a juggernaut is a very odd thing. What relevance does that observation have to the case. Sounds as if he has reservations about taking on the big boys, or is surprised that Jackson is.

3 Likes
3609

There will be some bullshit decision that will defy all logic. Not a doubt in my mind.

14 Likes
3610

I’d think it’s the latter.

A more of “are you sure you want to do this as it’ll be a very costly exercise, of which a powerful AFL can cover but can you?”

One would assume JT has some heavy hitting backers behind him on this to ensure he can.

3 Likes
3611

Is the afl supposed to be a non profit organisation?

1 Like
3612

I think judges are really careful to not let their courtrooms to be used as a soapbox or just to make a point. They don’t adjudicate on bad management. It’s not a forum to complain about a decision rightly adjudicated in another forum; or to make the defendants publicly say “I’m sorry we were wrong”; or to provide the groundwork for something else (eg an inquiry).
Doesn’t Jackson Taylor need to prove corruption or misrepresentation (which led to significant loss) and if he does the penalties are significant - but is he seeking something as significant as this?

5 Likes
3613

Of course he is seeking something significant, and he has a good case.

Otherwise, he would not have got this far against the AFL juggernaut and their million dollar lawyers.

And he would not have got the support of J Burnside QC

And critically, he would not have got the support of financial backers who put up the security.

9 Likes
3614

The report from Pierik in the Age:

YOUR SHORTLIST IS EMPTY
Add stories using the button
0 items in Shortlist
AFL
Cricket
Soccer
Racing
NRL
Rugby Union
Netball
Motorsport
Tennis
Basketball
Cycling
Golf
NFL
Athletics
Boxing
Swimming
Sailing

SPORTAFLSUPPLEMENTS SAGA
Judge reserves decision on latest twist in Essendon supplements saga
By Jon Pierik21 March 2018 — 6:24pm
AFL chief Gillon McLachlan and former chairman Mike Fitzpatrick could be forced to give sworn evidence if the Supreme Court rules the league has a case to answer in the latest instalment of the Essendon supplements saga.
A case brought by Melbourne lawyer Jackson Taylor alleging McLachlan and Fitzpatrick breached consumer law by engaging in deceptive conduct during the scandal was heard in the Supreme Court on Wednesday. Taylor was represented by prominent human rights lawyer Julian Burnside.
Gillon McLachlan (left) and Mike Fitzpatrick.
Gillon McLachlan (left) and Mike Fitzpatrick.
Photo: Joe Armao
AFL lawyer Gregory Harris QC argued any case would be expensive and should be limited. He said a trial should not involve lengthy cross-examination of many witnesses and discovery of documents.
Harris added the matter was not a usual one, where a plaintiff seeks damages from a defendant but was a case brought by a “punitive plaintiff” enlisting the help of a “highly qualified” and “sophisticated” lawyer like Burnside.
Burnside said a limited or “mini-trial” before a trial would not be the best way to decipher the facts on whether the league had acted in ways to protect its commercial interests during the scandal which became public in February, 2013.
Advertisement

Justice John Dixon reserved his decision to a date to be determined about which form a trial should take.
In his statement of claim, Taylor alleges several statements by McLachlan about the AFL’s joint investigation with the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority were misleading or deceptive.
He also alleges several statements made by AFL executives – about former Essendon coach James Hird, player welfare, an interim report by ASADA and the AFL’s decision-making – are examples of misleading or deceptive conduct.
Taylor has taken aim at Fitzpatrick over claims he said Hird would “never” be allowed back into football.
Former Essendon coach James Hird.
Former Essendon coach James Hird.
Photo: Michael Clayton-Jones
Fitzpatrick said last year that the AFL had no regrets over how it had handled the saga that led to a doping suspension of 34 players and impacted greatly on the AFL careers of Hird, former football department chief Danny Corcoran and Hird’s senior assistant, Mark Thompson.
Taylor failed to get to court because of a lack of funds when he initially lodged papers against the AFL in September, 2015, but he has since provided security for costs.
“The ultimate end game is to have a trial and to allow the public to have clarification the ways in which the AFL mishandled the investigation, including the way it treated Hird, Corcoran and Thompson,” Taylor said last year.

9 Likes
3615

:+1:t2:

1 Like
3616

That doesn’t sound very “punitive” to me.

3617

Get ready for a Supreme Court Levy on all tickets next season.

2 Likes
3618

Nothing gets by you. Sit tight and be vigilant.

2 Likes