• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Melbourne Rebels 2024

oztimmay

oztimmay

Tony Shaw (54)
Staff member
Highlander35 said:
Nothing particularly surprising. RA seeking accommodations due to their own unpreparedness, Consortium less than transparent on funding arrangements, Tim North knows everyone and anyone in the legal profession.
Click to expand...

The court heard the counsel for Rugby Australia was only first briefed on October 22.
Click to expand...

I mean, come on....
 
stillmissit

stillmissit

Peter Johnson (47)
Highlander35 said:
Nothing particularly surprising. RA seeking accommodations due to their own unpreparedness, Consortium less than transparent on funding arrangements, Tim North knows everyone and anyone in the legal profession.
Click to expand...
Amazingly stupid of them. They have known for months that this was coming. Here goes more millions that could have been saved. Judges don't like unprepared lawyers IMO.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
It's probably tactical.

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.
Click to expand...

Rugby Australia sends their silk the draft statement of claim received in March and then the statement of claim when filed to "review". They don't actually brief him (sign a letter of engagement) until October 22.

They then (unsuccessfully) ask the court for a delay.

With the ATO looming over the Rebels directors, trying to delay action on the court case to try and make life more difficult for their adversary is pretty standard.
 
oztimmay

oztimmay

Tony Shaw (54)
Staff member

Just getting better for everyone here...

1730378254830.png
 
The Ghost of Raelene

The Ghost of Raelene

Simon Poidevin (60)
stoff said:
They would be RA emails most likely. It’s a sensationalist way to report on discovery (sharing of documents that are relevant to the proceedings).
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's ridiculous wording.

"Server containing sensitive financial emails that threaten to blow up the code"

Pull ya head in Clown.
 
Sir Arthur Higgins

Sir Arthur Higgins

Dick Tooth (41)
I'd prefer is the rebels at this point and their ex board members just f@cked off. there is no benefit here to anyone. the rebels aren't coming back. i'd love a team in melbourne, but this team failed and a good portion of that failure was inept management. fighting to reinstate a loss making entity without a record of any success. check your egos at the door - you did a shit job. own up to it.
 
LeCheese

LeCheese

Greg Davis (50)
Sir Arthur Higgins said:
I'd prefer is the rebels at this point and their ex board members just f@cked off. there is no benefit here to anyone. the rebels aren't coming back. i'd love a team in melbourne, but this team failed and a good portion of that failure was inept management. fighting to reinstate a loss making entity without a record of any success. check your egos at the door - you did a shit job. own up to it.
Click to expand...
There is an immense financial benefit to the directors (relating to their penalty notices), and that is solely why this has progressed.
 
oztimmay

oztimmay

Tony Shaw (54)
Staff member
Last edited:
Wallaby Man

Wallaby Man

Nev Cottrell (35)
oztimmay said:
When you think things couldn't get any messier, they just did. RA could be jointly or severely up for the tax liability incurred by the Rebels, according to the administrator's legal team.

Click to expand...
I always thought this was a strong possibility. Also liable for any debts potentially owed to 3rd parties. Many people trying to do some mental gymnastics and distance RA but they can’t be. It’s a weird one but because they essentially control the revenue streams of the Super Rugby participants, they control if they are allowed to trade or not (need approval and sanctioning to set up fixtures, etc.), they control an element of sponsorship by approving potential revenue streams (can’t have a conflict of interest with partners of RA), it’s very messy. But always thought they would be found guilty to have failed due diligence in having checks and balances in place on an entity that they are clearly a stakeholder in. Shared contracts is another element that will work against them.
 
Dctarget

Dctarget

Tim Horan (67)
oztimmay said:
When you think things couldn't get any messier, they just did. RA should be held “jointly or severally liable” for the multi-million tax bill, state Gilbert and Tobin lawyers who are acting for the Melbourne Rebels’ administrators, PwC.

Click to expand...
Are PwC impartial here? They're not representing the Rebels board are they?

This is grim, I think RA screwed the pooch but I really, really don't want to see them get stuck with the bill. Can't the ATO forgive the tax debt, pretty please? :)
 
oztimmay

oztimmay

Tony Shaw (54)
Staff member
IIRC the administrators were appointed by RA, and they sought independent legal advice through Gilbert & Tobin. They've sought advice from the ATO and reported back to the administrator. I'd concluded there's appropiate independence here.

What's more striking - the Australian aren't reporting opinion or feeling here; it appears to be fact (quote) from the authoritive source (legal advice).

It's shithouse for all and I hope it can be resolved, ideally with the return of the Rebels. Perhaps RA and work a little more with the consortium to enhance the relocation/bailout proposal. Could unlock funds to pay the tax liability?

Don't think they can wait for the Lions tour to get them out of this financial mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top