The Parramatta Eels have today commenced legal proceedings against Zac Lomax. The purpose of the proceedings is to enforce the release agreed in November 2025.
We have endeavoured to resolve this by negotiations. This has included a formal independent mediation process with Zac Lomax and his legal team and representatives of the Melbourne Storm. However, no deal has been reached.
Zac’s legal team have informed us in writing that he does not agree that the terms of the release can be enforced against him. Regrettably, we have been left with no alternative, but to approach the NSW Supreme Court to resolve this issue.
In late July / early August, Zac requested a release from his playing contract with the Parramatta Eels to pursue opportunities outside the NRL. After a period of negotiation with Zac and his lawyers, the Parramatta Eels agreed to the terms of a release for Zac to pursue opportunities outside of the NRL. As part of the release granted on 16 November 2025, the Parramatta Eels included conditions to safeguard the Club.
One of those conditions was that Zac could not join another NRL Club before 31 October 2028 without our express written consent.
This protected the Parramatta Eels (and its Members and fans) from a football perspective heading into the 2026 season. It ensured the Club would not lose a representative player to another NRL club without receiving adequate compensation/benefit during the period of Zac’s original contract. Zac agreed to that condition after receiving legal advice.
Parramatta Eels Chairman Matthew Beach made the following comments:
“It is disappointing that we have reached this position, but we have an obligation to the Club’s stakeholders to protect the contractual rights of our Club and the expectation of our Members, players and supporters that contracts will be honoured.
“Back in November 2025, we granted Zac Lomax’s request for a release to pursue opportunities outside the NRL on the condition that he would not return to the NRL during the period of his original playing contract with our Club, without our written consent.”
”Zac had legal representation during the negotiations of his release. Zac accepted those conditions on the basis that he told us that his interests were focused on pursuing opportunities with rugby union, particularly R360. The release documentation was registered with the NRL. The NRL are aware of the conditions associated with the release.
“Our Club believes in the importance of observing contractual obligations. Contracts allow Clubs and players to operate with certainty and within a framework of rules. Contracts are the very stuff that any member of the community and companies have to honour in order to ensure that there is fair dealing. The same applies to the NRL, Clubs and players.
“Late last year, when we were approached by Melbourne Storm, we engaged with them in good faith however we have not been able to come to an agreement that would represent sufficient value for our Club, particularly in relation to our football program. The guiding position of our Club has been to ensure a fair exchange of value for our football program in circumstances where the Storm are attempting to obtain the benefit.”
“Zac and his agent still have an opportunity to work with us to explore options with the other 16 NRL clubs. Notwithstanding this action, we remain open to discussions with any Club who may be willing to offer the appropriate value for our football program.”
“Our coaching staff, players, Members and fans would not expect us to consent to the release based on what has been offered, and therefore we have no alternative but to pursue legal action to enforce the terms of the release and protect the rights of our Club.”
Arthur Moses SC has been retained by the Parramatta Eels to represent its interests in court,” added Beach.
Replies
hahahaha..I dunno, you randy?
I smell a rat/rats, but I think our club know what has transpired and we are not having it. Not without a fight
I still can't believe that Gillis drivel. It has to be part of their plan to get out of this or he may have just said the quiet part out loud while coked up
Ha no comment!
but Im so excited to read we have subpoenaed storm docs and lawyer who consulted on contract hehe
stick it to em Parra! Loving it
It just got a lot bigger on all of them and I bet none of them like it, not one little bit. We are going hard at them and I need popcorn.
Haha
HOE, I like your take on this, a show-down at high noon. Hopefully we are holding the AK47 and Lomax and his team turn up with butter knives...
So glad this is going to court I like this.
Jim and the club from the very beginning have made there point of view on this matter very clear.
They haven't got sucked into the media circus and comment around it.
They have a legally binding agreement and an understanding of what that means for the club.
The NRL have tried to leverage this as clearly Melbourne have been lobbying them in the back round to try and force Parra's hand.
No the doors been slammed shut and let's lawyer up Parra have in there best interests tried to enter into a negotiation with the player and the interested club to no avail.
Thats going to be there attack point the negotiated price I feel as the legal side seems locked up in our favour to me.Restraint of trade is the only angle they have Wheather that is an over riding factor to a signed and agreed document I don't know but for the most part the club cannot be faulted here the line in the sand was drawn early as above they've tried to operate in a manner firstly to help the player and secondly to look after the clubs best interest of which Lomax hasn't so off to court we go.
Actually you could say restraint of trade is in Parra's favour, their trade has been restrained by Lomax's actions and they bent over backwards to enforce this by having the release clause clarified the way it has been. Intent is that Parramatta would not have approved the release without the restraint clause being included......this maybe the argument that Lomax's lawyers try to undertake....the meanings of the original contract.
There can be no misconception the intent of this process was undertaken to protect Parramatta's interests. My guess this will be the legal argument that Arthur Moses will put in saying, "this argument was decided at the point of delivery of the contract".
I have never seen so many people backing PARRA, even mates that cannot stand PARRA are backing us. It feels weird being this backed, but I love it.
I know, i cannot believe it. Then you have the born with a silver spoon Storm fans who more likely never been told no in their lives, saying this is a desperate move by us. Pretty much saying Lomax was going to do this anyway and we just beat him to the punch. Ummmmmm if he was going to do it he would have done it by now, but no he got Melbourne to bitch to the NRL that injustice was happening and the NRL turned to them and said "Who is it? Who is upsetting you?" Then you see Melbourne, tears flowing from both eyes and a frown pointing in our direction.
Though this lawsuit is directed at Lomax, this is an awful result for the NRL and also Melbourne. As things will come to light if it does make it to court. Plus the RLPA will more likely be pissed at Parra but he is not an employee so i believe they have no grounds to support him.
I love in our statement too they mentioned the players would not be happy with how Lomax is conducting himself.
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
of 23 Next