What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

OT: Alex Mckinnon

Happy MEel

First Grade
Messages
9,436
Is anyone else uneasy about this? Fair enough, go after the NRL as an organisation but I don't know what he's hoping to achieve by suing McLean.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,062
There are precedents for this.

McCracken wins spear tackle damages case
February 22, 2005 - 5:34PM
  • mccracken_narrowweb__200x440.jpg
After the tackle ... McCracken on the ground.

Body contact sports face a new threat with a judge's ruling that Melbourne Storm and two former players are liable for damages over a tackle that ended Jarrod McCracken's rugby league career.

McCracken today successfully sued National Rugby League (NRL) team Melbourne Storm and former players Stephen Kearney and Marcus Bai in the NSW Supreme Court over a spear tackle on May 12, 2000.

The 34-year-old father-of-four and former Wests Tigers skipper said the tackle resulted in neck and spinal injuries and ended his playing career.

He said the tackle was intentional and done with intent to cause injury.
He had sued for $750,000 in damages, but the amount he receives will be determined by a separate hearing in August.

Justice Robert Hulme today ruled that Kearney and Bai, and therefore the club, were negligent in executing the tackle on McCracken.

He agreed they intended to cause the former New Zealand Test player injury.

"I do not agree that what occurred was but a normal incident of the game of rugby league," he said in his judgement.

The judge also said evidence from Kearney and Bai, who are now playing rugby league in England, that they pleaded guilty to the NRL Judiciary to an illegal throw over the incident further proved they intended to injure McCracken.

"I think their pleas also indicate an acceptance on their part that ... each of them did not exercise reasonable care," Justice Hulme said.

Outside court, the lawyer for the three defendants, Robert Crittenden, said they were disappointed with the result and warned it set a dangerous precedent for all body contact sports.

"This should send a shudder down the spine of ... administrators in any body contact sports and the insurance companies who insure them," he said.

Mr Crittenden said his clients would most likely appeal the decision.

At the time of the incident, McCracken was on a two-year contract for the 2000 and 2001 seasons on a fee of $300,000 a year.

McCracken claimed that if he had not been injured he would have continued his professional rugby league career, either in England or with the NRL.

He also said the loss of his rugby league career caused him to suffer depression.

Justice Hulme ruled the case did not fall under the NSW Civil Liabilities Act because the act was intentional.

Therefore, the payout would not be capped at $350,000 for general damages, or $2712 a week for loss of earnings.

While former NRL player and coach Warren Ryan gave evidence during the hearing that Kearney and Bai intended to cause injury to McCracken, Justice Hulme said it was not necessary to rely on it and he had come to his own conclusions.

"In my view the video recording of the tackle ... permits no doubt that the action of the second and third defendant ... were intentional," he said.

McCracken's lawyer, Bernard Gross, QC, said outside court that they were happy with today's result but would not comment further, pending the outcome of the damages hearing.

AAP

http://www.smh.com.au/news/League/M...le-damages-case/2005/02/22/1109046903562.html
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,062
This merkin who specializes in sports torts says

http://www.sportslawyer.com.au/the-...stralia-is-tackling-concussion-neck-injuries/

The most recent of these cases was that of Alex McKinnon, a 22 year old former professional rugby league player for the Newcastle Knights.7 McKinnon’s career was cut short in 2014 after a tackle in a game against Melbourne Storm caused him to sustain two broken vertebrae in his back. McKinnon was tackled by three opposition players. One of those players, was found guilty of performing a dangerous throw in breach of the Laws of the Game whilst the other two players were not charged.8

Similarly, West Tigers rugby league football player Jarrod McCracken suffered career ending spinal injuries after a poorly executed tackle in a game against Melbourne Storm in May 2000.9 The incident occurred after two Melbourne Storm players aggressively spear tackled McCracken to the ground.10 This tackle was also found to be a dangerous throw in breach of the Laws of the Game. During the NRL disciplinary hearing one player admitted that when he tackled McCracken he intended to put him hard on the ground and cause him minor injury.

McCracken subsequently brought negligence proceedings against the two players and Melbourne Storm.11 During that case, the court heard distressing evidence from a former player on the ordinary types of coaching instructions given to players:

“Players at elite levels of Rugby League… are personally taught and encouraged by their coaches and trainers to make significant impact at the initial collision stage of a tackle. They are also taught… to put [the opposition player] on the ground forcibly to cause hard bruising and impact with the ground which will hurt and discourage the attacker…” 12

In that case the court found that the actions of the Melbourne Storm players were unreasonably dangerous and went beyond what was taught. Melbourne Storm was found vicariously liable for their conduct and ordered to pay compensation. The NRL, as the sport’s governing body, has a clear duty to seek to eliminate the spear tackle given its serious injury risks, and has acted to do so.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,062
Is anyone else uneasy about this? Fair enough, go after the NRL as an organisation but I don't know what he's hoping to achieve by suing McLean.

Jordan McLean was the merkin who had his hand between the legs (illegal) and raised AMcK above horizontal (illegal) and it was his actions or negligence that was the effective cause of the injury. So yes, he needs to be named in the suit.

I am more interested in if Storm indemnify their player for all suits and actions. Storm coached McLean to wrestle, lift, slam and dominate the attacking player. IMHO McLean was doing his job and should not suffer any loss whatsoever.
 

Happy MEel

First Grade
Messages
9,436
Jordan McLean was the merkin who had his hand between the legs (illegal) and raised AMcK above horizontal (illegal) and it was his actions or negligence that was the effective cause of the injury. So yes, he needs to be named in the suit.

I am more interested in if Storm indemnify their player for all suits and actions. Storm coached McLean to wrestle, lift, slam and dominate the attacking player. IMHO McLean was doing his job and should not suffer any loss whatsoever.
True, but there's a fair difference in the intent and negligence on the part of the defenders between this:
IMG_2012.JPG

And this:
IMG_2013.JPG
It's a tackle that's gone wrong in my opinion. Tragic, but certainly an accident.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2013.JPG
    IMG_2013.JPG
    20.1 KB · Views: 1
Messages
14,796
Apart from Alex who will be awarded a squillion like he deserves.

The case will determine how much he gets and who pays it.

Oh for sure, but the lawyers will clean up in the process, they'll probably end up taking a sizeable chunk of his settlement/payout. In a manner of speaking, he'll never "win." He lost out the minute he was paralysed.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,624
Will there be long lasting effects for the game? ... i know they've already made alot of rules around certain things, but will it go much further?

Is it possible he might not win?
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,062
Will there be long lasting effects for the game? ... i know they've already made alot of rules around certain things, but will it go much further?

Is it possible he might not win?

Well if you break it down simplistically, he got injured at work and is now a paraplegic. At worst he may be found to have contributed % to the action, but the bottom line is that he got injured at work and is now farked. I can't see how the NRL, Storm or defender can be exonerated from blame.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,624
Well if you break it down simplistically, he got injured at work and is now a paraplegic. At worst he may be found to have contributed % to the action, but the bottom line is that he got injured at work and is now farked. I can't see how the NRL, Storm or defender can be exonerated from blame.
Just looking at those photos its pretty clear this is very different to the mccracken one .... and surely when you go suing an individual you go a bit beyond the got injured at work thing

I said it at the time and still believe he unfortunately contributed towards it a fair bit himself - really really unfortunate decision :pensive:

What are we gonna find that rugby league is simply too dangerous a profession?
 

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
51,913
McCracken used the money to illegally clear and develop land. What a merkin.

http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/Id/70297

Minister for Climate Change and Sustainability
The Honourable Kate Jones

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

McCRACKEN FINED $182,500 FOR CLEARING ON WHITSUNDAY COAST


Property developer Jarrod McCracken has been fined $182,500 in Proserpine Magistrates Court today over a number of charges including illegal tree clearing on a Whitsunday coastal property north of Airlie Beach.

Mr McCracken pleaded guilty on 10 May 2010 to a total of six charges brought against him by the Department of Environment and Resource Management and three charges by the Whitsunday Regional Council.

Magistrate Athol Kennedy ordered Mr McCracken to pay a fine of $140,000 plus a council penalty of $42,500 and costs of $33,000. Contractors Bastemeyer Group Pty Ltd, who carried out the works, were fined $10,000, with a council penalty of $30,000 and costs of $8,000.

Acting Climate Change and Sustainability Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk said they were serious offences.

“The environmental values of the Whitsunday region have been completely disrespected,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

“Mr McCracken has ridden roughshod over environmental laws that protect both the survival of rare local plant species and the health of the Great Barrier Reef.”

In early 2007, Mr McCracken began directing contractors Bastemeyer Group Pty Ltd to carry out clearing and earthworks on a 387ha property at Clarke’s Cove, owned by his wife Michelle McCracken.

The works included clearing approximately 13ha of remnant native vegetation, including rare Whitsunday bottle trees, for the purpose of constructing a road, a house site and a horse paddock, from approximately April to August 2007.

The clearing occurred not only on the property, but also on the adjacent strip of State esplanade reserve. It even encroached into Dryander National Park, 265 square metres of which was cleared.

“The clearing on and around the property has caused sediment run-off directly into Clarke’s Cove and Emperor Bay, which form part of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

“DERM’s investigations found that, at a very conservative estimate, 8516 tonnes of soil eroded during the period May to December 2007.”

The works ceased after the Planning and Environment Court ordered Michelle McCracken, as the property owner, to stop carrying out the earthworks and tree clearing.

Ms Palaszczuk said despite being an experienced property developer, Mr McCracken had neglected to follow the rules.

“This is a case in which the basic ground rules for owning and developing property have been blatantly disregarded,” she said.

“Mr McCracken has chosen to ignore development assessment rules by clearing trees, carrying out earthworks and even desecrating the cultural heritage values of the site without any authority to do so.

“The construction of a rock retaining wall on the esplanade reserve has irreparably damaged an Aboriginal shell midden, while other works have irreparably damaged other physical cultural heritage items on the property, which included stone artefacts,” she said.

DERM charged Jarrod McCracken with:

o Taking of a protected plant (in relation to 14 rare Whitsunday bottle trees) - Section 89 Nature Conservation Act 1992.
o Interfering with a natural resource of a protected area (in relation to the ingress into the National Park); - Section 62 Nature Conservation Act 1992
o Wilfully causing environmental nuisance (in relation to the sediment run-off into the Marine Park) - Section 440 Environmental Protection Act 1994
o Doing a trespass related act (clearing, excavation and earthworks on the esplanade reserve land) - section 404(1) Land Act 1994
o Carrying out assessable development without a permit (clearing of native vegetation on freehold land) - section 4.3.1(1) Integrated Planning Act 1997
o Failing to discharge cultural heritage duty of care (failing to take reasonable measures to ensure works did not harm Aboriginal cultural heritage) - section 23 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003.

Rehabilitation and revegetation of the site and other affected areas is occurring and relevant authorities will continue to monitor this.

“This case demonstrates that DERM will take action against anyone who fails to undertake the appropriate enquiries and permits before clearing land,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

MEDIA CONTACT: 3239 0824
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,062
Just looking at those photos its pretty clear this is very different to the mccracken one .... and surely when you go suing an individual you go a bit beyond the got injured at work thing

I said it at the time and still believe he unfortunately contributed towards it a fair bit himself - really really unfortunate decision :pensive:

What are we gonna find that rugby league is simply too dangerous a profession?

Mclean may not be guilty in your eyes, but his actions on the field were illegal. Didn't Darryl Brohman (sp) (?) sue Les Boyd (?) personally for breaking his jaw on the field ?
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,624
Mclean may not be guilty in your eyes, but his actions on the field were illegal. Didn't Darryl Brohman (sp) (?) sue Les Boyd (?) personally for breaking his jaw on the field ?
Apples and oranges ... les boyd was reckless as f**k and intended to cause injury

I realise this is probably mostly a financial decision from mackinnon ... guess he's gotta do what he's gotta do
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,062
Apples and oranges ... les boyd was reckless as f**k and intended to cause injury

I realise this is probably mostly a financial decision from mackinnon ... guess he's gotta do what he's gotta do

Yes the circumstances were apples and oranges, I cited the Les Boyd case as a precedent of where a player has launched civil action against another player because of an injury sustained in a match.
 

Latest posts

Top