- Jul 14, 2014
- 2,874
- 5,910
Plenty of times the threat of legal action is enough in and of itself.
THE BOSS Dave Donaghy - Broncos CEO
- Thread starter McHunt
- Start date
Kooly87
NRL Captain
- Jun 2, 2017
- 4,197
- 7,275
If you are legally minded, or at least advised by people who are, both of which are boxes Donaghy can likely tick, then you know they're largely unenforceable and it's basically irrelevant if they're left in or not.
Melbourne would only bother pursuing this out of spite and because with wealthy private owners they can comfortably afford a frivolous lawsuit. A company that had to answer to shareholders would be rightly scolded for wasting funds on something like this though.
- Sep 22, 2016
- 3,459
- 6,193
In saying that, it does smell of complete inept from the board. You dont go announcing a CEO starting when the legal ground hasnt been completely cleared. If you do, you must be sure 100000% theres no fallout and have the guns to shut it down immediately - for the sake of PR and reputation.
Surely at CEO level and having worked for the club before you're not sitting there all timid and shy and not wanting to upset anyone?
Wouldn't your solicitor read it as well and say that's crap get them to take it out?
Seems to me if its useless why is it there and if it's illegal why is it there. If someone had said something at the start what could now be a whole mess could have been avoided.
Kooly87
NRL Captain
- Jun 2, 2017
- 4,197
- 7,275
It's not that it's 'illegal' it's just that it's not enforceable in practicality.
People put unenforceable or unreasonable terms into contracts all the time that later get contested because sometimes they do get away with it. It's basically the main reason why one whole half of the entire legal profession exists, to argue these finer points in courts and through mediation to get a result one way or the other on a point of contention.
Dave Donaghy has been a Sports Administrator for decades and with recent experience in the NRL as his main and most recent skillset and experience. If you insert a clause in his contract requiring that he not be a Sports Administrator in the NRL for a period of time after leaving your employment that is almost certainly going to be viewed as a restraint of trade and therefor not enforceable.
Melbourne would essentially have to prove that it is a reasonably necessary clause needed to protect the legitimate interests of their business. The fact that a CEO's role is largely commercial in nature and that these clubs operate in two totally different cities only exacerbates how hard it is to reinforce that point and makes it even more exceedingly unlikely that they'd have much to work with. As I said above, if this was a club answerable to shareholders it would be viewed as a very poor use of resources. When you have a small group of private owners with very deep pockets, you can afford to take it personally, even if a good result is fairly unlikely.
This happens all the time in a huge range of industries and it's particularly prevalent amongst senior leaders and executives especially so this is certainly not unusual in terms of these sort of matters.
Last edited:
He was unproven as a CEO when he signed the CEO contract though.
So the party with all the contractual (and indeed financial) negotiating power at such time would have been the Storm, almost in a ‘take it or leave it’ approach.
So far as I understand, contracts in Australia have to be bilateral, insofar as they cannot be heavily weighted in favour of one party over the other. But non-compete clauses are just like sunset clauses in real estate contracts. Often there are so many buyers wanting a property, they have no choice but to accept the sunset clause, which only benefits the seller (and of course, the real estate agent).
Last edited:
Kooly87
NRL Captain
- Jun 2, 2017
- 4,197
- 7,275
Correct, it's about what's fair and reasonable for both parties. In this instance, the burden of proof would be on Melbourne to prove that it is not fair and reasonable that Donaghy seeks employment in the industry he's just spent several years employed in. He's a Sports Administrator with recent experience as an NRL CEO and just about any judge would agree that it's reasonable that he seeks employment in the industry that his skillset best applies to, which in this instance is the NRL.
It's frivolous at best, and unless you have pretty deep pockets and a willingness to act in spite, your legal counsel would be strongly discouraging you from pursuing this one.
- Jul 28, 2016
- 23,514
- 34,592
I believe the board have indicated Donaghy has signed a letter of intent or something similar, indicating that he has formally accepted the position.
The board have not yet flagged a starting date because of the storm's shenanigans.
I don't really see what the issue is with what they have done.
Kooly87
NRL Captain
- Jun 2, 2017
- 4,197
- 7,275
Even if we had to operate for six months with literally no CEO, it's simply not possible for even the empty chair to do a better job of utterly torching the place than Paul White managed in his previous stint.
- Jul 28, 2016
- 23,514
- 34,592
I believe the IP, company secrets, etc. are covered by the NDA and would effectively be permanent.
Whereas the non-compete clause should essentially be related to actions that lead to commercial harm... hence why there is a time period.
To me that is basically if Donaghy "poaches" a sponsorship deal or something that storm have in the works and is something that Donaghy has intimate knowledge of.
What I'm not really understanding is why a non-compete clause could even allow someone to not take up employment elsewhere.
It shouldn't stop him from taking up the Broncos post... and should be more along the lines of if Donaghy breaches a conflict of interest within the 6 month period then the storm could say he breached the non-compete clause and seek damages
Last edited:
Kooly87
NRL Captain
- Jun 2, 2017
- 4,197
- 7,275
Theoretically, he's more likely to be able to do commercial harm to Melbourne by joining an AFL club or someone like the Melbourne Victory given they operate in the same metropolitan market and are competing for the same corporate and membership dollars.
theshed
Just a Game
- Aug 28, 2010
- 15,427
- 35,877
Tripp had a sook when the Donaghy rumour first started about us stealing their CEO, Coach, and Captain.
Tin foil hat but perhaps Trip was saying more than we realised.
Last edited:
Skyblues87
QCup Player
- Feb 9, 2017
- 847
- 1,405
Thats easily sorted. Just say it was PW who poached Bellamy
Everyone knows we were after him before appointing a new CEO.
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,477
- 27,135
The empty chair would do a far better job.
Broncos Staff Member: "Darius Boyd has come to us with a huge offer from a rival club, so to keep him should we offer him 800k for 4 years?"
Empty Chair: "......."
Broncos Staff Member: "You're right, that is a ridiculous amount considering his current level and age, we'll offer him 500k for two years take it or leave it, thanks Empty".
Broncos Staff Member: "Just been talking to Isaac Moses about a heap of our players and he wants to have player options put into their contracts for multiple years, can't see any harm in that and it obviously means they love it here and want the option to stay"
Empty Chair: "......."
Broncos Staff Member: "Of course why didn't I think of that, PO's only benefit the player and lead to complacency or will have them go to the higher bidder if they play well giving absolutely no benefit to the club, thanks Empty Chair you always know what to say."
Broncos Staff Member: "I think we should give Anthony Seibold a 5 year contract with no performance clauses, I mean he is the freaking Dally M coach of the year!"
Empty Chair: "......."
Broncos Staff Member: "When you put it that way he has only been a head coach for 2 years of a roster that was already high performing, let's make it 2 years with the option to extend if he goes well".
Empty Chair: "......."
Broncos Staff Member: "You think we should have some performance clauses in there too? You got it!"
Broncos Staff Member: "As you know Kayla and Darius are pregnant so we thought we would have an exciting gender reveal after the game to celebrate tonight"
Empty Chair: "......."
Broncos Staff Member: "You have a point, if we lose tonight we win the first wooden spoon in our club's history and celebrating on the field no matter the occasion would be a terrible look and would be a massive insult to all our fans. I'll tell the guys to have it queued up but if we lose then it is called off and they need to at least pretend to be disappointed in the result".
Empty Chair: "........"
Broncos Staff Member: "Actually now that I think about it more, even if we do win and avoid the wooden spoon this has still been a terrible season filled with disappointment, poor attitudes and an overall disconnect from the fans and the legacy of this club; I'll tell them that we won't do it on the field but will arrange a really nice private celebration to honor Darius and their upcoming family addition. Thanks EC"
Last edited:
