[furrycat];4444413 said:
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.