Manase Fainu

[Bearfax]

The second issue...are you bored yet...is the question of what happens if a player has his contract torn up or has expired. He finds no club prepared to sign him because of the No Fault judgement and if he was someone at Fainu's level and this went on for three years, what would be the consequences?

Effectively this becomes a question of restraint of trade. He's not being paid, he cant ply the game he's trained for. He's denied the right to earn a living in an area he has trained hard in for years, and reached the top of his field. Sure he could play for a minor league, but he would receive nothing like the money he would earn as a top NRL player.

The NRL have been very lucky up to now that the teams involved have been prepared to finance these players whist they are suspended despite it being for the team in the short term of no benefit. And what if a club tore up his contract, which I suspect is illegal. I would argue the player has a very good case to sue the NRL and club for millions if he is found not guilty of the charge.

I dont think the NRL has thought this through too clearly.

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

Law is about who sells the best story. Really the phrase "the truth will set you free" really doesn't apply. It's about selling your argument. With a judge , they are one persons view of the presented facts or story. The Judge through their experience will come to a decision based on previous cases and the chances of likelihood in most instances and not put up with crap. With a jury in Australia you need to convince 11 people or 2 people of guilt or innocence. You can get convicted with 11 jurors or set free with 2 jurors. Hence if you have a story or there is confusion, you would go for a jury trial as you only need 2 jurors not to be convicted as a jury have normal people who will listen to the evidence and getting agreement is really a hard sell. Probably why there are some people on the street who shouldn't because of the system.

At end of day it depends on which Judge you get and then decide which way to go. I'd say that the judge listed for case has a tougher line on these type events and so the defence has gone for a jury who won't convict or can't make up it's mind.

Personal belief it will go ahead next year, be a hung jury, then wait 12 month for a retrial to happen again then Police Prosecutor will discontinue....sound familiar. I'm a cynic so I reckon it is all about billable hours....Lawyer's get richer , careers reputations get ruined.

Thanks and agree totally that the law is an ass sometimes and the truth might well not set you free. And yes probably agree about the hung jury - if so what a shambles is the no fault stand down policy

 

[Disco]

The second issue...are you bored yet...is the question of what happens if a player has his contract torn up or has expired. He finds no club prepared to sign him because of the No Fault judgement and if he was someone at Fainu's level and this went on for three years, what would be the consequences.

Effectively this becomes a question of restraint of trade. He's not being paid, he cant ply the game he's trained for. He's denied the right to earn a living in an area he has trained hard in for years, and reached the top of his field. Sure he could play for a minor league, but he would receive nothing like the money he would earn as a top NRL player.

The NRL have been very lucky up to now that the teams involved have been prepared to finance these players whist they are suspended despite it being for the team in the short term of no benefit. And what if a club tore up his contract, which I suspect is illegal. I would argue the player has a very good case to sue the NRL and club for millions if he is found not guilty of the charge.

I dont think the NRL has thought this through too clearly.

This is a great point actually.

Imagine a player who is off contract this year being stood down....

 

[Bearfax]

This is a great point actually.

Imagine a player who is off contract this year being stood down....

Not meaning to suggest I know more than a High Court judge about the law, but I wonder if she may have made an error in judgement given the likely consequences of such a situation. Really it is in contravention of the question of restraint of trade, as well as a suggestion of a presumption of guilt. Obviously she knows a lot more of law than I do but as I said, judges are human and make mistakes. I've seen it happen, not often, but it does.

 

[The Who]

Who is paying Fainu's wage, Manly or the NRL?

 

[Bearfax]

Who is paying Fainu's wage, Manly or the NRL?

Manly of course. That's the point. What if they didnt?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

No-one has a right to an NRL contract. Players are passed over all the time, for many different reasons.
Jaryd Hayne was off-contract, and which club in their right mind would sign him?
I'm no expert but I don't think the restraint of trade angle has legs, personally.

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

Who is paying Fainu's wage, Manly or the NRL?

Pretty sure we are, but that it's not counted in the salary cap. I think that was the case with De Belin as well.

 

[40 years an eagle]

I hope we re all-out looking for another 9...it is our highest recruitment priority . We NEED 3 of them..and a backup FB.

 

[Bearfax]

No-one has a right to an NRL contract. Players are passed over all the time, for many different reasons.
Jaryd Hayne was off-contract, and which club in their right mind would sign him?
I'm no expert but I don't think the restraint of trade angle has legs, personally.

Jarod was found guilty. No issue. But if not and lets say he was wanted by certain clubs but they were being refused to allow him to ply his trade with them, and yet it was determined finally that he was innocent, he has been denied an income in his occupation. I think you find that's restraint of allowing him to utilise his skill at that level and earn an income that position offers.. In other words they are prepared to employ him to meet his work requirements, but cant because of a rule that denies them of using him for the sole purpose of playing the game, even if he is contracted That's restrain of trade. And it would seem restraint of trade upon the player as well.

Think of it this way. I'm a company director and I have a very skilled worker who is very important in the production of my goods. Now the employee is charged with an indictable matter that will go through the courts for a couple of years. The overseeing authority of that kind of business instructs the owners that they cannot use his skill in the company until the court matter is resolved. They can continue to pay him if they wish but cant use his skill. What recourse does the company director have. Now its important to recognise there are exceptions to the rule concerning restraint of trade. Issues such as endangering other people, such as a child care worker, a conflict of interests, such as with a policeman, which is clearly stated in the law regarding these matters (I looked it up). But this has nothing to do with the persons capacity to do the job and there is not danger to others or conflict of interests (and that is the issue that makes this matter with Fainu, such a problem because the decision was based on a discretionary position, not a position in unambiguous law), In law, if you read it, they are the exemptions, but the exceptions dont apply here. Now this employer wants to retain the employee but he's not allowed to use him. So he has no option but to ask him to leave so he can find another employee to do the job. The employee is then found not guilty but has been unable in the meantime to utilise his specific skill and loses considerable income. That seems to me restraint of trade and I suspect the employee would be in his rights to sue.

The NRL is playing it tricky here by hiding behind the clubs prepared to continue to pay their players, so a claim made against the League would offer little. The issue is if the player was denied an income because of the rule, and the exceptions dont apply then I suspect he has a case.

 

[KNUCKLES]

Either way I hope there is some contingencies in place.. I've been saying for a few years now we should look at Jacob liddle

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Jarod was found guilty. No issue. But if not and lets say he was wanted by certain clubs but they were being refused to allow him to ply his trade with them, and yet it was determined finally that he was innocent, he has been denied an income in his occupation.

Didn't you go through all this stuff last year with @susan ?

Maybe you're right but I don't see it. Better chance of negotiating some relaxation of the rule for selected cases via NRL or RLPA than of getting any joy from the courts, is my guess. Someone might test it again one day, I suppose.

 

[Ranga]

Jarod was found guilty. No issue. But if not and lets say he was wanted by certain clubs but they were being refused to allow him to ply his trade with them, and yet it was determined finally that he was innocent, he has been denied an income in his occupation. I think you find that's restraint of allowing him to utilise his skill at that level and earn an income that position offers.. In other words they are prepared to employ him to meet his work requirements, but cant because of a rule that denies them of using him for the sole purpose of playing the game, even if he is contracted That's restrain of trade. And it would seem restraint of trade upon the player as well.

Think of it this way. I'm a company director and I have a very skilled worker who is very important in the production of my goods. Now the employee is charged with an indictable matter that will go through the courts for a couple of years. The overseeing authority of that kind of business instructs the owners that they cannot use his skill in the company until the court matter is resolved. They can continue to pay him if they wish but cant use his skill. What recourse does the company director have. Now its important to recognise there are exceptions to the rule concerning restraint of trade. Issues such as endangering other people, such as a child care worker, a conflict of interests, such as with a policeman, which is clearly stated in the law regarding these matters (I looked it up). But this has nothing to do with the persons capacity to do the job and there is not danger to others or conflict of interests (and that is the issue that makes this matter with Fainu, such a problem because the decision was based on a discretionary position, not a position in unambiguous law), In law, if you read it, they are the exemptions, but the exceptions dont apply here. Now this employer wants to retain the employee but he's not allowed to use him. So he has no option but to ask him to leave so he can find another employee to do the job. The employee is then found not guilty but has been unable in the meantime to utilise his specific skill and loses considerable income. That seems to me restraint of trade and I suspect the employee would be in his rights to sue.

The NRL is playing it tricky here by hiding behind the clubs prepared to continue to pay their players, so a claim made against the League would offer little. The issue is if the player was denied an income because of the rule, and the exceptions dont apply then I suspect he has a case.

@Bearfax, have you read the Federal Court's decision in the de Belin case?

Paras 208 - 308 set out the relevant reasoning re why the NRL's policy was not an unreasonable restraint of trade. Seems sound to me.

Also, I've said it before and I think it is important. The decision wasn't appealed by de Belin or taken on by any club or the RLPA. Unless they are all complicit (maybe they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them), it seems that have have formed the view that the legal reasoning was sound too.

De Belin v Australian Rugby League Commission Limited [2019] FCA 688

www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au

 

[Shnorky]

Nrl needs to consider Player welfare.
Don't worry Abdo is a manly fan, so hell look after us just like Tony, Mike and gladys did

 

[Jerry1]

Young Sea Eagles hooker facing further 12 months on sidelines

Court delays have placed a potential return for the 23-year-old back to mid next year.

www.zerotackle.com

 

[SeaEagle21]

Pretty sure we are, but that it's not counted in the salary cap. I think that was the case with De Belin as well.

I thought he is counted against our cap but if you wanted to bring in a replacement player for one stood down that the club would need to fund that themselves, after given dispensation from the NRL to do so?

 

[MissKate]

Can anyone access the article behind the Tele paywall saying that 2 witnesses had come forward to say Fainu didn’t do the stabbing

 

[Peter C]

Can anyone access the article behind the Tele paywall saying that 2 witnesses had come forward to say Fainu didn’t do the stabbing

Here

Two new eyewitnesses come forward in NRL player Manase Fainu’s stabbing case​

Manly hooker Manase Fainu’s lawyers say they’ve found two new eyewitnesses to the stabbing who claim he didn’t actually do it.

Derrick Krusche



@derrick_krusche

2 min read
August 2, 2021 - 3:12PM




Current Time 0:23
/
Duration 1:14





NOW PLAYING
Resume

Manly NRL star Fainu released on bail
1:14
UP NEXT

November 12, 2019. Manly football manager John Bonasera and lawyer Elias Tabchouri speak to reporters outside the NSW Supreme Court in…



Two new eyewitnesses to a stabbing that NRL player Manase Fainu was charged over but who have come forward to claim he didn’t actually do it are expected to give evidence at his trial.
The Manly Sea Eagles hooker was mentioned in Parramatta District Court on Monday – a week after he was dealt a major blow to his career when he was told he would have to wait until July next year to fight the allegations before a jury due to Covid.
The 23-year-old hasn’t played a game since 2019 when he was sidelined under the NRL’s no fault stand-down rule after being charged with intentional wounding over the incident during a brawl at a Mormon church dance in Sydney’s southwest.

Manase Fainu with his mother at the Dally M awards,
The court was told the victim himself doesn’t know who stabbed him and that witnesses in the Crown’s case have conflicting accounts about what happened.
Outside court, Fainu’s defence lawyer Paul McGirr said two new eyewitnesses to the incident who were never interviewed by police will be called to give evidence at the trial.
“I can confirm that there are two witnesses, two eyewitnesses who were present who weren’t interviewed by police who will be coming to court and stating, we envisage, that it was not our client that did the stabbing,” he said.

Fainu leaves Parklea jail after being granted bail.
“Basically, what you’ve got is the victim not knowing who did it to him … but now there’s also two other witnesses to the actual incident who have come forward and will be giving evidence for the defence”.

Daily Telegraph - News Feed
No Jab, No Footy Plan Underway 02/08/21




00:00

03:00




The court also heard prosecutors had served a section 38 notice against one of the main witnesses in the case.

Mr McGirr said outside court that application was in relation to prosecutors wanting to seek to cross examine that main witness who could actually help Fainu’s case.


“The defence aren’t going to cross examine someone who helps their case, (prosecutors) don’t necessarily get to treat him as an unfavourable witness, it’s an application that will be made by the Crown,” he said.

Judge Gina O’Rourke, SC, said Fainu was facing the prospect of a lengthy jail stint if he’s found guilty when his lawyers appeared before her in court to seek variations to his bail conditions.

“He’ll be serving a significant period in custody if he gets convicted,” she said.

Crown prosecutor Emma Curran mentioned to the court Fainu had a prior conviction for filming someone “in an intimate situation”.

More Coverage​

Manly star Manase Fainu’s plan to get back to NRL NRL star’s rehab stint exposes ‘rife prescription drug use’
She said if Fainu’s curfew conditions are amended there should be a requirement that he must be with his parents if he leaves his house at night.

Judge O’Rourke agreed to reduce Fainu’s reporting to police to three times a week and also ordered that he must be with his mum or dad if he leaves his house between 9pm and 6am.

 

[Captain Moondog]

Hopefully these witnesses can identify who did do the stabbing.

 

[tookey]

NRL to be asked to reconsider Fainu ban after shock case twists

The emergence of two eye-witnesses who claim Manly hooker Manase Fainu wasn’t responsible for a church dance stabbing is among several key developments in the case.

www.smh.com.au