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!

Sounds like we are off to court

Voice of Reason

Juniors
Messages
359
Just reported on NBN news that the Knights SEO late today recieved a letter from Reynoldson's lawyers (details not discolsed). The tone of Mike Rabitts comment implied that this was not good news. Burreston said in the interview should legal demands be put by Reynoldson on the club, "all offers would be off the table and it would be lawyers at 20 paces". Sounds to me its about to get worse.Hope I am wrong. :?
 

Voice of Reason

Juniors
Messages
359
Your'e right Gene but it looks like thats the case WITHOUT any legal action. Didnt he say he spent the day on the phone ringing NRL clubs looking for a deal and couldnt find any opportunity. Clubs must have been watching him play over the last few years i'de suggest.
 

Burwood

Bench
Messages
4,977
We always knew this letter of intent was going to be sent by Reynoldson's lawyer, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the matter will ever see a court room.

I fairly confident that the two parties will come to an agreement before the week is out and Reynoldson will be playing in Friday nights match.
 

cram

Bench
Messages
3,396
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22278454-5001023,00.html

By Barry Toohey

August 21, 2007 12:00am

THE contract stand-off between the Newcastle Knights and unwanted forward Kirk Reynoldson reached flashpoint yesterday with court action moving a step closer to reality.

The pressure is building on Knights coach Brian Smith to name Reynoldson in the team today to meet North Queensland after the club was sent a letter of demand late yesterday threatening court action by solicitors acting on behalf of the second-rower.

If he is selected to play his 15th NRL game of the season, he will activate a retention clause in his $196,500 contract for 2008.

But if he is again snubbed, players' association president Matt Rodwell said he believed Reynoldson would have a case for discrimination if he is not selected today.

"The team selection tomorrow is an important day for the Newcastle club," Rodwell said yesterday.

"According to the club, Kirk's non-selection has been based on form.

"But given the display of the team at the weekend against Penrith, maybe it is fair to say he is being discriminated against if he doesn't get a call-up this week."

Reynoldson's selection against the Cowboys would end any talk of possible court action by the second-rower.

The Knights were sent a letter of demand late yesterday from Davidson and Sullivan Solicitors acting on behalf of Reynoldson.

In the letter, obtained by The Daily Telegraph, the club is given 48 hours to respond to a demand that Reynoldson's contract be honoured or risk the matter going to the Supreme Court.

"The contract provides in clause 30.4 that if our client plays in 15 or more NRL first grade matches during the 2007 season, the club will automatically exercise an option for the 2008 season at the sign-on fee nominated in schedule 2 in the sum of $196,500," the letter reads.

"Our client has this year to date played in 14 matches and is concerned that the club by intentionally not selecting him to play his 15th match of the season is attempting to not honour its contract with him.

"Our advice to our client is that, if the club failed to select him to play his 15th match when his performances warranted selection, the club has breached its duty of care to him."

Knights senior executive officer Steve Burraston said late yesterday he was not in receipt of the letter.

"I haven't seen any letter as yet," Burraston said.

"But it doesn't concern me too much. I am very comfortable with both our legal and moral position in regards to Kirk."

Burraston also denied any added pressure to name Reynoldson in the team for the Cowboys game.

"There is no pressure whatsoever," he said.

"He can be selected or he may not be. We have a few players coming back.

"We expect to have Bedsy (Danny Buderus), Josh Perry and Dan Tolar all available for selection this week."

The Reynoldson camp is denying it has received any formal settlement offer from the Knights but is not interested even if one is put on the table.

"All Kirk is interested in is playing for the Knights," mentor Les Ross said.

"He's not interested in a settlement or a termination payment. He just wants to honour his contract."
 

macavity

Referee
Messages
20,638
they are basing their claim on "duty of care" ??

LOL

they could argue it was intentional frustration of the contract

they could argue it was constructive unfair dismissal

hell, they could argue it was workplace discrimination

but noooo.... "duy of care"

:lol:

kirk, if you are reading this - CHANGE LAWYERS.
 
Messages
16,034
I honestly dont see why him not being in the clubs plans for next year isnt sufficient.... I mean as if we are not going to play, players that we have plans on rather then him.

Pretty f'n simple.
 
Messages
2,477
Would he have made a difference against Penriff?

NO CAUSE HE HASN'T MADE A DIFFERENCE FOR THE LAST 3 YEARS.

TIME TO WAKE UP STUPID!!

KIRK, YOU ARE A SUB-STANDARD RUGBY LEAGUE PLAYER.
 

Nuffy

Bench
Messages
4,075
Geez I hope we do end up in court, I would like to see the law firm and Reynoldson actually have to ante up.

Here is a direct except from the lawyers letter in the Daily telegraph

"The terms of the contract do not disclose any obligations of the club in favour of the player but in the writers opinion a court would determine that at all times your club must act fairly, justly and honourably."

So the contract is clear but they want to shame the club into surrender.

I find it more that a little ironic that the law firm is asking the club to act in a fair, just and honourable manner when I would contend that Reynoldson has not done so during the course of the last 3 years.

I believe that once he signed a marquee level contract with the club, which he did, he had an obligation to deliver on field performances commeasurate with the level of his contract.

He has not fulfilled his obligation to the club over 3 years and now expects the club to extend their obligations to him.

As he is one of the highest paid players within the club, his performances must reflect that, to justify his pay packet, he must perform at an elite level week in and out.

This is not happening hence I can understand that the club would prefer to chose other players who are offering much better performance respective to their contracts.

Finally, I find it ironic that the player asked for the media to stop talking about this issue and then allows the circus to start again.

Irrespective of what happens Reynoldson is not worthy to play for the Knights.
 

Nuffy

Bench
Messages
4,075
CLP

I think that the player knows that this is his last chance at a decent contract, as Peter Tunks said, hes a PL player who should be on 50k a year.

The player is clutching at straws and couldn't care less about the club, team or players.

I hope they say "see you in court"
 

Nuffy

Bench
Messages
4,075
Now that the club has received this letter, aren't they obliged to engage and brief their own legal team as a precaution and because they have been threatened with legal action, shouldnt they freeze Reynoldsons situation so as not to prejudice their case in either way.

I would assume that if the club was being prudent, it would take two to three weeks to get the necessary legal team in place and briefed and during that time Reynoldson would be in limbo (of his choice) whilst the club reviewed and prepared their position.

Due to Reynoldsons actions the club must protect itself and part of that must be that Reynoldson can't play either way, so as not to prejudice his or the clubs case.

I would suggest that by the time all this was in place it would be the end of the regular season.

I'm wondering whether Reynoldson may have snookered himself with this type of action.
 

Voice of Reason

Juniors
Messages
359
From the Telecrap website:

Reynoldson overlooked again


Article from: </IMG>
By Phil Rothfield
August 21, 2007 12:30pm

UNWANTED Newcastle forward Kirk Reynoldson appears set to press ahead with legal action against the Knights after again being overlooked today for first grade by coach Brian Smith
The Knights squad will be officially announced this afternoon to meet North Queensland at EnergyAustralia Stadium on Friday night but Reynoldson has already been told he has not been chosen despite being fully fit and available for selection.

Smith broke the news to the secondrower prior to training this morning.

Reynoldson needs to play one more top grade game to activate a clause in his contract guaranteeing he will remain at the Knights next season on a deal worth $196,500.

If he fails to reach the quota, his NRL career could be over as his attempts to find a new club for 2008 have proved fruitless.

The club was sent a legal letter of demand by solicitors representing Reynoldson late yesterday giving them 48 hours to respond or risk possible Supreme Court action because of alleged “duty of care’’ considerations.
Share this article What is this?



:clap:
 
Messages
2,477
This is beyond a f**king joke and it opens up a huge Pandora&#8217;s box for clubs.

E.g Joe Galuvao - Now he is a real bloke, took it on the chin and is trying to get
back to some form in the QLD Cup, not threatening the club that supported him.
 
Top