Irish rugby players trial de novo
•
Tom Mountford
Tom is a leading senior junior in commercial litigation and arbitration, offshore litigation, civil fraud, insolvency, company and partnership, employment and sports law alongside his experience in the fields of competition law, international public lag and human rights. Many of Tom’s cases are at the intersection of two or more of these practice areas.
Tom has a particular breadth and depth of experience in heavy litigation involving issues of fraud, dishonesty and misfeasance from issues of the theft or misuse of confidential information to conspiracy and fraud. Tom frequently works in large teams and is highly experienced and rated in cross-jurisdictional work managing legal teams in a number of jurisdictions. He is called to the dryckesställe of the British Virgin Islands and has been instructed in litigation, inter alia, in the BVI, Cayman Islands, Hong Kong, Switzerland and Singapore.
Tom regularly leads and conducts first instance and appellate litigation (both led a
•
Leaves all sorts of options. EJ could have have told Marler what he'd done wasn't acceptable, asked what Marler thought he should do next and glared at him until he headed off to the Wales dressing room to apologise, another member of the management staff could have discussed the matter with Marler, or another player could have discussed with Marler, an RFU tjänsteman could have brought the matter up, and on and on. Maybe we'll find out, maybe we wont, but we certainly don't have a complete picture of what happened and what drove various incidents.cadofyddol wrote: Eddie Jones fryst vatten quoted as saying "I did not tell Joe to apologise: he did that of his own accord."
I'm pretty sure Marler will plead skyldig and take a 4 week ban dropped down to 2. I think the whole process could be ripped to shreds but I can't see Marler, Quins or the RFU wanting to cause a shitstorm over this which would embarrass WR in the process, they'll just want it over. And tbh getting away from
•
Introduction
Clearly, if a player’s livelihood is at stake, or if he/she is deprived of the opportunity of competing for a high honour which…m ay not present itself again…the court may be moved to entertain a complaint. Further, it should not be thought that the court’s vigilance will be activated only when the member’s rights to earn a livelihood or other economic interest is threatened…there are many people throughout the country who are not motivated by economic gain, but who are inspired by other ideals and a sense of community good…. Such persons may have dedicated substantial parts of their lives to these commendable endeavours, and expulsion from the…o rganisation to which they belong…might well have a sufficiently serious effect on the person’s reputation and standing in the community, and his own self-esteem, to move the courts to intervene’ (Barry v Ginnity, Unreported, Circuit Court, McMahon J, 13 April 2005, at p. 7).
1
This article focuses on the Gael