For SBW

[Bezant]

How about the Bulldogs forcing him to admit he had a drinking problem?

Using his name and image to attract sponsorship. Which he gets no amount of money out of.

If $400,000 is no amount of money then I'd quite happily work for nothing too:roll:

As to his drinking problem perhaps the bulldogs were advise to take this action by the clubs doctors/support staff who felt that getting the issue out in the open may have helped to cause a change in Sonny's consistent negative behaviour with this issue. We don't know the facts behind this so it is difficult to condemn on little evidence. Also was it a factual statement or not? Was Sonny in denial even back then?

Sorry still not convinced the Bulldogs did anything wrong. Anyone else with some solid evidence of wrong doing by the 'dogs?

 

[Tommax25]

stop kidding yourself.

once you leave australia, the courts have little jurisdiction over you.

im not a lawyer and I'm not sure how these things work so I need to ask if sonny (or anyone for that matter) robbed a bank but flew out of the country before being caught can Australia do anything about it? Same with murder ect., because surely they couldn't and I'd like to know what the line is.

 

[bartman]

It's like eastsrule and Johns Magic share a brain.

Or a brain stem?

(Sorry guys, had to be said, nothing personal ;-))

*Edit - and I think mik01 needs a stare of that stuff as well *

 

[mik01]

And this is where you are wrong. We have many legal treaties with France; extradition treaties etc... If he is deemed to be in breach and injunction put in place, then the international supreme court will uphold it.

If I murdered someone here, I can't just flee to France and say its ok they wont get me...

If an injunction is put on SBW, and he plays for Toulon, he has then broken the law and it is a whole different ball game.

hahahahahahahahaha....
international supreme court? ok - you REALLY have no legal background, do you?

my best guess on the result of this case, WITHOUT any understanding of the evidence involved, is that the court could rule in favour of the nrl however even if they do, SBW can no longer fulfil the performance of such a ruling.

ie - what are they going to get out of him? a injunction perhaps, however does that have jurisdiction in France? no
damages? perhaps. this would be the best course of action - look for money rather than him coming back.
specific performance? he will argue that the nrl and the dogs said he could never come back, therefore cannot be ordered to remedy his breach. (laughing at dickhead Gallop's emotional comments early on... he ruined his own case)

so it looks like they will spend a packet of money, might be awarded damages (if it can be quantified), won't succeed with stopping him playing for someone else or won't succeed with getting him to return to fulfil the contract.

either way, they lose financially. the smart money says to let him go and use the money on buying a marquee player.

 

[bartman]

He talked to the Bulldogs club about being unhappy. You'd have to be stupid not to assume that he would leave if the status quo remained or got worse?

What did the Bulldogs do to make SBW feel more comfortable? We don't know.

Well publically, they are on record as having guaranteed the guy the future captaincy, and he publically appeared on the Footy Show shortly before his "ballsy choice" (his words :lol to up sticks and leave almost everyone in the lurch, and his own contract terms and credibility in tatters.

The Dogs (and the League) are now entitled to chase him for compensation/damages, and to get him to recoup the costs they make in doing so. He proved he's not very bright tonight, and that interview won't do his side on any court case any good.

 

[eastsrule]

im not a lawyer and I'm not sure how these things work so I need to ask if sonny (or anyone for that matter) robbed a bank but flew out of the country before being caught can Australia do anything about it? Same with murder ect., because surely they couldn't and I'd like to know what the line is.

The extradition process is very complicated, particularly with the EU. My understanding is that he can fight any extradition back to Australia in a French court and then the European Court of Human Rights.

The key, however, to this is the seriousness of the offence to warrant the expense of public resources and other related matters. This is where I believe a French court would not go to a great deal of effort to help the NRL on. There is also the matter of which this is actually a crime in the country that he is getting extradited out of. The interpretations of the contract etc will be huge in this instance.

Why do I say this? Because this happens in other sports all the time and would set a precedent.

 

[Lungfish]

No it is not.

A club telling a player that he can't drink for two years to play for the team is an absolute joke.

Not if your on your third chance from a club whose just resigned you for close to 400k a year for 4 years.He wanted out and will be in England before long.Im glad Manly didnt win the battle to sign him!

 

[mik01]

:lol: You obviously have none...

Restraint of Trade can only be deemed if it is proven the restraint is unreasonable and lowers the standard of living... SBW is on $400k+...

Please, you are talking out of your arse here and are saying the most BASIC thing about the legalities of contracts. And put it simply, you don't know my background so I don't need your little law lecture.

Put it simply, his contract has not been made invalid has it? No. So can he just walk away? No.

Get it deemed invalid, then walk away. Thats how it works

its obvious you can't argue with an idiot.

international supreme court. f**k, I'm still laughing at that one..:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[[furrycat]]

its obvious you can't argue with an idiot.

international supreme court. f**k, I'm still laughing at that one..:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Didnt take you long to get personal and avoid all arguments did it?

Go read up how supreme courts can have jurisdiction in international law and foreign countries based on particular sanctions and treaties... obviously I've worded it wrong for you and you feel the need to act like a twat and avoid all arguments to get personal.

Grow the f**k up.

 

[eastsrule]

Also, whilst I have a limited understanding of international law. I do recall that extradition treaties need to be specific on the crimes that can be extradited. So it depends on what crime (if any) he is accused of.

 

[Yngwie_70]

Didnt take you long to get personal and avoid all arguments did it?

Go read up how supreme courts can have jurisdiction in international law and foreign countries based on particular sanctions and treaties... obviously I've worded it wrong for you and you feel the need to act like a twat and avoid all arguments to get personal.

Grow the f**k up.

The question really is; Who has the deeper pockets, NRL/Bulldogs or the French guy who owns Toulon? Any court ruling will take months and big $$$$ which I am sure the NRL would not want to blow on a player who doesnt want to play for the Bulldogs!

 

[mik01]

The extradition process is very complicated, particularly with the EU. My understanding is that he can fight any extradition back to Australia in a French court and then the European Court of Human Rights.

The key, however, to this is the seriousness of the offence to warrant the expense of public resources and other related matters. This is where I believe a French court would not go to a great deal of effort to help the NRL on. There is also the matter of which this is actually a crime in the country that he is getting extradited out of. The interpretations of the contract etc will be huge in this instance.

Why do I say this? Because this happens in other sports all the time and would set a precedent.

this is a civil action. there will be no extradition.
this is not a crime, he hasn't broken any laws.

this is purely a contractual dispute between two parties.

i could get into jurisdiction but we would go on and on for ages. suffice to say that Australian courts have no jurisdiction in other countries, hence why in criminal matters they must apply for extradition and prove to that court that the defendant has a case to answer.

certainly in a civil matter, a foreign country (court) would take the view that the matter is between the two parties and not a matter for that country to intervene in.

just my 'limited' legal knowledge for ya furry...

 

[eastsrule]

After a bit of research.

The treaty between Australia and France (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/dfat/treaties/1989/27.html) states that an extraditable offence is:

1. For the purposes of this Treaty, extraditable offences are offences which are punishable under the laws of both Contracting Parties by imprisonment or other deprivation of liberty for a maximum period of at least two years or by a more severe penalty.

I doubt anything that SBW is convicted of will be for a jail sentence.

 

[bartman]

Your boss making racial comments about your close mates isn't exactly smart

Nothing racial was said, or even alleged by SBW.

Probably got sick of the circus hanging around before and after training - and rightly so as a coach made a comment about it.

Whether it was directed at the religion we'll have to wait and hear a right of reply - I'd find it hard to believe at the club where Hazem El Masri has been a senior player throughout his playing career.

 

[eastsrule]

this is a civil action. there will be no extradition.
this is not a crime, he hasn't broken any laws.

this is purely a contractual dispute between two parties.

i could get into jurisdiction but we would go on and on for ages. suffice to say that Australian courts have no jurisdiction in other countries, hence why in criminal matters they must apply for extradition and prove to that court that the defendant has a case to answer.

certainly in a civil matter, a foreign country (court) would take the view that the matter is between the two parties and not a matter for that country to intervene in.

just my 'limited' legal knowledge for ya furry...

I know it is a civil matter. However a situation MAY arise where Sonny Bill is accused of defying a court order which would be a criminal offence.

Either way, the treaty I linked to mentions that only matters that are punishable by jailtime can be extradited.

 

[Johns Magic]

Nothing racial was said, or even alleged by SBW.

It was implied(religious if we're being technical).

 

[mik01]

Didnt take you long to get personal and avoid all arguments did it?

Go read up how supreme courts can have jurisdiction in international law and foreign countries based on particular sanctions and treaties... obviously I've worded it wrong for you and you feel the need to act like a twat and avoid all arguments to get personal.

Grow the f**k up.

you made a couple of personal comments directed at my general knowledge, and specific knowledge of legal affairs. even after I strongly hinted to you that I have more than a passing understanding of legal matters.

yes I did have a swipe at you over that terminology - but it did make me laugh when you were so sure I had no knowledge then sprouted your 'restraint of trade' cut and dried explanation.

treaties/sanctions are applicable where countries are signatories to such articles - we don't even know whether France and Aus are signatories, nor doe we even know under what law we would even refer to - we don't even know what ruling the court will announce, nor what remedies the nrl are seeking.

we are so far ahead of this its not even worth arguing. I'm just trying to teach you the basics of contracts, civil cases and jurisdictions.

admit you have no intimate legal knowledge and stop trying to tell me what I know and we will get along just fine.

 

[bartman]

It was implied(religious if we're being technical).

In which case please refer to the rest of my reply:

Probably got sick of the circus hanging around before and after training - and rightly so as a coach made a comment about it.

Whether it was directed at the religion we'll have to wait and hear a right of reply - I'd find it hard to believe at the club where Hazem El Masri has been a senior player throughout his playing career.

 

[Johns Magic]

In which case please refer to the rest of my reply:

SBW certainly did imply that it was defamatory. Hence alleged racism.

 

[mik01]

I know it is a civil matter. However a situation MAY arise where Sonny Bill is accused of defying a court order which would be a criminal offence.

Either way, the treaty I linked to mentions that only matters that are punishable by jailtime can be extradited.

yep - wasn't replying to you sorry - the person you were replying to.

but you're right, maybe only contempt of court if he defies the possible injunction - this would be the only scenario that jail would apply.
even then it would be laughably minor and very doubtful he would be extradited under a treaty for such an action.

more like if he ever stepped onto Australian territory again, he would be arrested and would serve whatever sentence was handed down.

look - I just can't see it happening

goodnight