Rumoured and Confirmed Signings and even more Crap XXIII

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

I can see a CEO delegating a limited authority to subordinate managers to only offering contracts within a specified maximum definition (i.e. Seward delegating to Anderson only to do contracts up to a certain value)

But what Board in this country would only limit the CEO to do limited tasks. Your CEO runs your organization. The Board provides the strategic direction and oversight of that strategic direction.

It's not uncommon (in fact it is the norm) for Boards to require that they ratify major strategic decisions taken by the CEO and other executives. However, unless it is made clear in the contract that the firm is not bound until the board signs off on the contract, then under normal circumstances if the CEO signs a deal on behalf of their employer, the employer is bound.

Obviously there are exceptions....e.g. if the CEO signs a contract that no reasonable person would believe was in the scope of their powers. Like if the CEO bought himself a yacht and signed the company up for it.....the vendor would know that transactions like that would need to be authorised / ratified by someone other than the CEO.

 

[Gronk]

It's not uncommon (in fact it is the norm) for Boards to require that they ratify major strategic decisions taken by the CEO and other executives. However, unless it is made clear in the contract that the firm is not bound until the board signs off on the contract, then under normal circumstances if the CEO signs a deal on behalf of their employer, the employer is bound.

Obviously there are exceptions....e.g. if the CEO signs a contract that no reasonable person would believe was in the scope of their powers. Like if the CEO bought himself a yacht and signed the company up for it.....the vendor would know that transactions like that would need to be authorised / ratified by someone other than the CEO.

Here is the issue: Did the CEO have authority to commit the salary cap to a risk which was the compensation clause of up to $1m ?

 

[Glenn]

But he is obviously not going to go away and just let the any board do what they want without him having his input at whatever AGM.

As a member he is entitled to have his input like any other member, but that's the extent of things.
Certainly not influencing board decisions etc.

 

[Jake the snake]

When Seward is able to talk it will be interesting what he'll have to say on who knew what, what approvals were given. Very interesting!!

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Here is the issue: Did the CEO have authority to commit the salary cap to a risk which was the compensation clause of up to $1m ?

This is a contract relating to activities that are clearly within the scope of employer's (i.e. PLC) operations.

There are 2 issues: 1) Was the CEO expected by his employer to have the terms of this contract ratified by the Board (it seems the answer is yes) and 2) if the CEO signs up anyway, is the club bound.

It seems to me that the answer to 2) is 'yes'. The fact that the CEO may have exceeded the limits of their authority is not the other party's (Foran's) problem in this case. It is the PLC's problem and the CEO's problem.

As per my other post...it would be quite different if the CEO had offered Foran $500,000 of PLC money to come around and mow the CEO's lawn. A reasonable person would be expected to query such an offer.

NOTE: There has been no reason suggested as to why Foran would doubt that the CEO had been given authority to agree to the term in question. For all he knew, the CEO had been told just how much he could offer and with what additional options.

 

[ash411]

When Seward is able to talk it will be interesting what he'll have to say on who knew what, what approvals were given. Very interesting!!

If the board didn't have an NDA (Non-discolsure agreement) attached to his employment contract, they definitely are dumber than a rock.

 

[Gronk]

When Seward is able to talk it will be interesting what he'll have to say on who knew what, what approvals were given. Very interesting!!

Does not mean that he will tell the truth. After all he is unemployed and possibly unemployable in a similar role.

 

[Jake the snake]

Does not mean that he will tell the truth. After all he is unemployed and possibly unemployable in a similar role.

I just can't believe nobody else had known about it.....
Club lawyers? Other people must of given this the go ahead. Seward came out in an article not to soon after Foran had signed and divulged that their was clauses.

 

[Fearless Freeman]

Let's take a deep breath for just a minute and consider the following FACTS:
1) Parramatta reported their salary cap concerns to the NRL
2) NRL confirmed and fined Parra $525,000 and asked for independent review etc
3) During the course of reviewing the non compliant contracts remedial action has to
be implemented e.g .the Peats contract.(It would seem there will be other adverse
features to be addressed and remedial action implemented during the review
process)

4) When the review is fully completed Parramatta will then begin squeaky clean and
fully salary cap compliant.
Two important points emerge from the above:
1) The current Board are taking positive action to clean up this mess (albeit a very
painful experience for everybody)
2) Some mole in the organisation continues to leak details to the media who then go off half cocked with excitement because Parramatta is always a good story for ratings and newspaper sales (why let the facts get in the way of a good story!)
SUMMARY: Support the Board through this difficult process, they are trying hard to get things on the right track. On the field, give the players our continuing support.

 

[Gronk]

This will bring a smile to your merkin faces.

Nathan Peats ‏@peats05 28m28 minutes ago
So exhausted just walked 12km home from training

 

[Casper The Ghost]

What they failed to mention was that it was the NRL who refused to register the contract.

But I guess there is more headlines in Eels bashing rather than NRL bashing.

News Limited bashing News Limited................

 

[Joshuatheeel]

I just can't believe nobody else had known about it.....
Club lawyers? Other people must of given this the go ahead. Seward came out in an article not to soon after Foran had signed and divulged that their was clauses.

Club lawyers would surely know ? Don't know a lot about contracts / law etc but from my experience I would assume the clubs lawyers would write up the contract not the club secretary / office manager etc etc

 

[Dibs]

Fearless Freemason and Casper must get on like a house on fire ��

 

[Gronk]

Club lawyers would surely know ? Don't know a lot about contracts / law etc but from my experience I would assume the clubs lawyers would write up the contract not the club secretary / office manager etc etc

NRL contracts are pro forma.

 

[Twizzle]

If the board didn't have an NDA (Non-discolsure agreement) attached to his employment contract, they definitely are dumber than a rock.

They did have one which is why we are not hearing anything from him atm. There is a time limit on it tho so no doubt when it expires he'll have plenty to say.

 

[ash411]

NRL contracts are pro forma.

So how did they add the clause in? A lawyer must have at least written the clause to insert into the contract. I doubt a contract of this size would be left to marge at the front desk to type up.

 

[ash411]

They did have one which is why we are not hearing anything from him atm. There is a time limit on it tho so no doubt when it expires he'll have plenty to say.

Hopefully it's like 20 years or something..

 

[Twizzle]

So Firtzy is organising rallies now ??

Rallies from factional voters is probabaly about the worse thing that could possibly happen right now.

More clickbait for the media.

 

[Twizzle]

So how did they add the clause in? A lawyer must have at least written the clause to insert into the contract. I doubt a contract of this size would be left to marge at the front desk to type up.

They add an appendix to the contract

 

[Joshuatheeel]

NRL contracts are pro forma.

How would that be possible with all the clauses / TPA etc etc that are included. There may be an NRL template but surely any additions are added by lawyers? I couldn't see any one agreeing to a contract that wasn't reviewed / worded by a lawyer in a situation like this.

You see a lawyer / conveyancer just to buy property even if it's only $100k, surely a $5 million contract would have lawyers all over it?