Gil and Fitzpatrick Named in Writ -- the saga

Remove this Banner Ad

I struggle to understand how any penalties can be handed down against Vlad, Gil and Fitzy if they are found to have engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct. It's a provision of consumer law and as far as I understand the person bringing the action must prove that they have suffered loss or damage. Not sure that Burnside's client will be able to show that.

Looks like an exercise in muck raking rather than a case that will see sanctions handed down.

Dummy's guide to misleading and deceptive conduct.
https://legalvision.com.au/a-basic-...e-misrepresentations-australian-consumer-law/


It's a fishing exercise

Watch the gun rip em a new one, lots to look at , who blinks first

GO JULIAN
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I wonder if Taylor will be granted a full trial because it appears, he is not arguing he has been directly affected under the terms of the claim - On the other hand, I continually read how the AFL is corrupt, so would expect a groundswell of support on BF for this action.
 
Joking aside...A quick check of this guy gives the impression of 'trying to make a name for himself' much more than 'distinguished legal mind', so yeah, could easily be doing it more for the attention and a share of any winnings.

I doubt the AFLs lawyers are quaking in their books.

Geez
Burnside absolute gun and has a social conscience

There very worried
Join the dots
 
THE Essendon drugs saga returns to the Supreme Court at 9.30am tomorrow where Justice John Dixon will rule on the AFL’s bid to avert a full blown trial over its handling of the six-season scandal.

Human rights lawyer Julian Burnside, QC, is leading a case brought against the league and top brass Gillon McLachlan and Mike Fitzpatrick alleging misleading and deceptive conduct.

Lawyers for the AFL have sought a limited trial on preliminary issues restricting the need for witnesses or the discovery of documents, but if that application is dismissed, McLachlan, Fitzpatrick, former AFL boss Andrew Demetriou and former AFL integrity unit manager Brett Clothier face the prospect of being called to give evidence.
 
The ideal outcome would be for Gil to go into a full blown "you can't handle the truth" meltdown and state they were actually protecting Essendon from big bad WADA because the AFL had proof that Essendon was doping but didn't want them facing sanctions....



Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk
 
Isn't it the case that the ACC's evidence, which Demetriou was briefed on, was not allowed to be passed on to ASADA? I would like for that to become public.

Maybe the evidence related to Charter/Dank and Dimi just joined the dots.
I continually read how the AFL is corrupt, so would expect a groundswell of support on BF for this action.
Several things point to the AFL having knowledge of what was going on, up to a year before it became public. Let it be heard!
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Taylor will be granted a full trial because it appears, he is not arguing he has been directly affected under the terms of the claim - On the other hand, I continually read how the AFL is corrupt, so would expect a groundswell of support on BF for this action.

The issue here is, and has always been, that most non Ess BF supporters think the AFL were corrupt in this case, in that they did everything they could to protect Essendon during this saga and get the players off, even to the point of branding the whole thing a supplements saga. So hence no such support from BF about Essendons constant sooking about the big bad AFL being out to get them. Surely this isnt new news.
 
THE Essendon drugs saga returns to the Supreme Court at 9.30am tomorrow where Justice John Dixon will rule on the AFL’s bid to avert a full blown trial over its handling of the six-season scandal.

Human rights lawyer Julian Burnside, QC, is leading a case brought against the league and top brass Gillon McLachlan and Mike Fitzpatrick alleging misleading and deceptive conduct.

Lawyers for the AFL have sought a limited trial on preliminary issues restricting the need for witnesses or the discovery of documents, but if that application is dismissed, McLachlan, Fitzpatrick, former AFL boss Andrew Demetriou and former AFL integrity unit manager Brett Clothier face the prospect of being called to give evidence.
Lets hope that the truth finally come's out so we can bury this matter for good, but something tells me that the AFL don't want the whole truth to come out and will duck and dive where ever they can.
I would love to see Fat Andy take the stand and the oath, as in my opinion he knows more about this than anybody.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The issue here is, and has always been, that most non Ess BF supporters think the AFL were corrupt in this case, in that they did everything they could to protect Essendon during this saga and get the players off, even to the point of branding the whole thing a supplements saga. So hence no such support from BF about Essendons constant sooking about the big bad AFL being out to get them. Surely this isnt new news.
Well said...
 
from theage.com.au
AFL chief Gillon McLachlan and former chairman Mike Fitzpatrick have moved a step closer to having to appear in the witness box to explain their actions in the Essendon supplements saga.

Supreme Court judge John Dixon ruled in favour of Melbourne lawyer Jackson Taylor on two key issues on Wednesday. Taylor has fought against the AFL for years, alleging McLachlan and Fitzpatrick engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct through the scandal which rocked the sport when exposed in February, 2013.

In his statement of claim, Taylor alleges several statements by McLachlan about the AFL's joint investigation with the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) were misleading or deceptive.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...afl-boss-nearer-to-trial-20180606-p4zjr8.html
 
4a124-4monkeys-donothing252cseenothing252chearnothing2526saynothing.png
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top