The legal standoff between two rugby league bodies over the election of a club powerbroker has spilt into the Supreme Court.
The NSWRL has not received a complaint from the club powerbroker who is at the centre of its high-stakes standoff with the ARL Commission, a court has been told.
Rugby league’s latest civil war spilt into the NSW Supreme Court on Thursday, with the NSWRL suing the ARL Commission.
The spat centres on NSWRL board elections earlier this year when Cronulla chief executive Dino Mezzatesta was told he was not eligible due to a conflict of interest.
It prompted two of the game’s biggest heavyweights – Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis and former NSWRL chairman George Peponis – to resign as directors.
Mr Mezzatesta was told he was ineligible for a position on the board because he was a paid employee of the Sharks.
But that move prompted ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys to step in and launch an investigation.
Prominent barrister Bret Walker SC provided legal advice to the ARL Commission that the NSWRL board elections should be run again.
The ARLC then warned the NSWRL that it would withhold funding to the NSWRL until there was a fresh election, prompting the NSWRL to launch legal action.
During a hearing of the matter in the NSW Supreme Court on Thursday, the NSWRL claimed that the ARLC had breached a member’s agreement that includes the provision of funding for the running of the grassroots game in NSW and the State of Origin teams.
The court was told that the ARLC argued that it had not approved a budget for its funding of the NSWRL for the year.
But the state body pointed out that it was paid in December, January and March and the ARLC had only now decided to stop making payments because it took issue with the make-up of the NSWRL board.
In an affidavit, NSWRL chief executive Dave Trodden said the state body had not received a complaint from Mr Mezzatesta about him being excluded, the court was told.
Nor has the decision been objected to by Penrith and Canterbury, the clubs that nominated him for a spot on the board, the NSWRL’s barrister Robert Newlinds said.
“There is still a board, it can achieve a quorum and it can function,” Mr Newlinds said.
“The real complaint is it is not the board that the ARL would like us to have.”
The NSWRL has not received a complaint from the club powerbroker who is at the centre of its high-stakes standoff with the ARL Commission, a court has been told.
Rugby league’s latest civil war spilt into the NSW Supreme Court on Thursday, with the NSWRL suing the ARL Commission.
The spat centres on NSWRL board elections earlier this year when Cronulla chief executive Dino Mezzatesta was told he was not eligible due to a conflict of interest.
It prompted two of the game’s biggest heavyweights – Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis and former NSWRL chairman George Peponis – to resign as directors.
Mr Mezzatesta was told he was ineligible for a position on the board because he was a paid employee of the Sharks.
But that move prompted ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys to step in and launch an investigation.
Prominent barrister Bret Walker SC provided legal advice to the ARL Commission that the NSWRL board elections should be run again.
The ARLC then warned the NSWRL that it would withhold funding to the NSWRL until there was a fresh election, prompting the NSWRL to launch legal action.
During a hearing of the matter in the NSW Supreme Court on Thursday, the NSWRL claimed that the ARLC had breached a member’s agreement that includes the provision of funding for the running of the grassroots game in NSW and the State of Origin teams.
The court was told that the ARLC argued that it had not approved a budget for its funding of the NSWRL for the year.
But the state body pointed out that it was paid in December, January and March and the ARLC had only now decided to stop making payments because it took issue with the make-up of the NSWRL board.
In an affidavit, NSWRL chief executive Dave Trodden said the state body had not received a complaint from Mr Mezzatesta about him being excluded, the court was told.
Nor has the decision been objected to by Penrith and Canterbury, the clubs that nominated him for a spot on the board, the NSWRL’s barrister Robert Newlinds said.
“There is still a board, it can achieve a quorum and it can function,” Mr Newlinds said.
“The real complaint is it is not the board that the ARL would like us to have.”
Mr Walker told the court that the ARL Commission was within its right to withhold funding.
“Seeing a defectively constituted board and not being able to do anything until something goes wrong, in our submission, is not a mark of an appropriate administration of our business let alone our rights under the services agreement,” he said.
He added: “This is a relation of unequals, this a relation of subordination and it’s a relation which makes sense.”
He said the key test was not that Mr Mezzatesta had a potential conflict of interest, but rather whether he had a potential “material” conflict which would affect his ability to sit on the NSWRL board.
“The provision of a schedule is not signing your death warrant for your nomination,” Mr Walker said.
“Either in the court’s eyes, and possibly the board’s eye, there has to be objectively a potentially material conflicting interest.”
Justice Michael Ball will hand down his decision at a later date.
www.canberratimes.com.au
