A federal court judge has rebuked Rugby Australia’s bid for more time to respond to a blistering demand from the Melbourne Rebels, finding the national sports body was well acquainted with the allegations levelled against it.
The decision was made on Thursday during the first hearing of the court proceedings, after the defunct Super Rugby club launched a damages claim earlier this month against Rugby Australia in the Federal Court, demanding $30 million from the peak body.
Rugby Australia must file their counter-claim by November 7, a judge has ruled. Credit: Vince Caligiuri
In response, the national body announced it planned to countersue the seven Rebels directors, accusing the group of deceiving it from at least 2018 about the former rugby club’s financial position.
Representing Rugby Australia, Sydney silk Tony Bannon SC – who has worked on several sports administration matters including assisting the NRL in its investigation of the Storm salary cap scandal – argued the Rebels’ statement of claim was deficient because it did not provide enough specific detail about the allegations it was making against the sporting body. This includes allegations that senior Rugby Australia representatives said particular things at meetings with the Rebels directors.
Bannon also told the court that RA needed more time to consider whether it might lodge its own legal action in response. “There will be genuine and serious credit issue about whether these representations were made,” he said.
Bannon also told the court that one of RA’s first steps was to seek the funding agreement for the case from the head of the consortium pushing to rescue the Rebels, Leigh Clifford, a former chairman of Qantas and the former chief executive of Rio Tinto.
The Rebels players at the end of their final Super Rugby game in June.Credit: Getty Images
Clifford, who is the father of Rebels director Georgia Widdup, and now focused on private investment activities, was asked by RA to provide a list of his assets to assure the sporting body he was capable of funding the case. It is not clear whether Clifford was forced to detail his personal wealth to RA.
“We will be seeking to lodge a cross claim, bringing in other parties including the directors, and we would need time before we took that step because it is a significant step if we were to do this,” he said.
Counsel for the Rebels, Philip Crutchfield, KC, told the court that Rugby Australia was already familiar with the allegations and there had been “stony silence” from the sporting body regarding its claims.
“Rugby Australia has been on notice made in the statement of claim since the 1st of March. On that day, we provided the solicitors for Rugby Australia with the draft statement of claim,” he said.
“On 9 July, we provided another draft of the statement, and it’s … substantially in the same form as it is now, ” he said.
“There has been no attempt by Rugby Australia to engage in the matter at all.”
The court heard the counsel for Rugby Australia was only first briefed on October 22.
Justice Anderson ruled that Bannon had demonstrated in court that he was well aware of the details of the case, and ordered that the national rugby body must file their counter-claim by November 7.
Crutchfield also argued any mediation should led by a retired High Court judge, and urged that if the case went to trial, it should be expedited given the circumstances of the case, namely the director penalty notices issued to the seven Rebels’ directors, which made them personally liable for the Super Ruby Club’s multimillion-dollar tax debt.
A spanner was thrown in the works when Justice Anderson announced that one of the directors, Tim North, KC, was a friend whom he shared his barristers chambers with for 20 years, and had invited over to his home for a dinner party in the coming weeks.
The judge told the court he would seek to transfer the case to another judge.
