Rebel man
John Thornett (49)
I appreciate your response. While not seeing any of the evidence and not being a lawyer at all I do believe it would be a difficult case.I'm unsure what that has to do with the Corps Act.
Yeah, if they can prove that they would potentially have a case. That said I would be absolutely stupefied if anyone with enough authority at Rugby Australia had put in writing that they were willing to cover the external debts of the Rebels. I find it very hard to believe that would have happened.
Ultimately here though we're talking about separate entities.
If entity A (Rebels) owes a whole lot of money to the ATO and entity B (RA) owes entity A some money, entity B isn't liable for that debt to the ATO. Now they might still be liable for that debt to entity A.
Rugby Australia were a creditor when the Rebels were dissolved so I find it hard to understand how the Rebels directors are going to prove that there was a debt owing by RA to the Rebels.
I believe the issues with governance run a lot deeper than just the Rebels. My guess with the corporations act is that RA was fully aware they were trading while insolvent. What evidence can they provide? I don’t know. Yet one of the directors is a KC and practices in that area of law. I can’t see him perusing the case if he thought it had no hope at all.
If the rebels lose the case I will be critical of their decision to take action, but until there is a decision on the matter I will stand by their right to take legal action if they feel they have been wronged