Happy Monday, if anyone wants a good laugh to start their week, skip to 32:50 mark and listen to this f***wit talk. It is laughable seriously. Claiming the offer of $300k was a great deal and we can put that into our junior system. But said we can put some money into the cap but at same time said they cannot break the rules in regard to cap as it is unfair. But can break the rules with contracts?
Replies
The issue is not so much V'Landys siding with Storm, for him it is publically saying so. He already is a hypocrite showing his muscles over a 10 year ban. When push came to shove he decides to defend the person that signed for R360. Go figure.
But coming out publically was idiotic. Thing is he knows exactly what he is doing, he is arrogant enough to believe it will go in his, the NRL and Melbourne's favour.
Daz, the third option is a read down. Technically it'd be an Eels win but it could be spun as a moral victory for Lomax/PLV/Storm: like us, the equity courts saw the restraint as being too punitive.
It's a safe option for the courts too in some ways as Lomax doesn't have clean hands, but a restraint until 31 October 2028 is a heavy although arguably a deserved price to pay.
It's going to be interesting to see how the courts see this.
This guy has lost me now ....did some good things over Covid...maybe that was just a coincidence. Getting to realise hes a grade A dope
I am beginning to think that the courts have no choice but to uphold Parra's contract and say Parramatta can negotiate anything with Lomax regarding him returning to the NRL..... i.e the contract stands. Further to this the circumstances of the R360 contract has no bearing on the terms of the contract. The reasons Mr Lomax chose this course is subject to his original agreement with Parramatta.
Mr Lomax decided his own fate in signing the contract under legal advice. Parramatta's only interest is the terms of same and Mr Lomax can persue any number of options outside of the NRL on his own veracity.
In saying this I am assuming that Storm are not looking to join the case and the same goes for the NRL. Anything else in the forementioned matters is what we (the court) are ruling on.
End of subject.
PS the public and the ARL can rule on the commentary's (not the courts) that have come from both Storm and the executive management of the NRL. I believe the ARL has every right to censure the NRL executive comments and request an investigation over the correspondence entered into by the NRL CEO and his counterpart at Melbourne Storm, the acceptance of the original contract lodged with the NRL by Parramatta and the "notional" contract by Storm in the "portal".
Though i wonder Poppa, i am generally asking as law is not my strong suit, if the court uphold it and Parra win the case that means the NRL can then be involved again since it is out of court. Will they abide by that too or can they still favour Melbourne and put the heavies on?
As V'Landys said $300k is a great deal.
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
of 6 Next