NEWS Lodge's league exile officially over

[Jedhead]

Tell the seppo lawyer he can get stuffed.

As a lawyer I find it distasteful the way that American lawyers speak to the press.

I read you the first time bro. :-)

 

[Foordy]

I find it hard to believe they are going to try and enforce this civil judgement. Surely it's going to be too expensive for them and they'll stop trying.

it wouldn't take them too much ... they would just need an order from an Australian court ... and why wouldn't they lawyers (and plaintiffs try) there is around $1.8 million at stake it not like they are only chasing a couple of hundred here

 

[Broncs_Fan]

it wouldn't take them too much ... they would just need an order from an Australian court ... and why wouldn't they lawyers (and plaintiffs try) there is around $1.8 million at stake it not like they are only chasing a couple of hundred here

And under what law can an Australian court enforce a US civil order? Sounds like pie in the sky stuff.

 

[Foordy]

And under what law can an Australian court enforce a US civil order? Sounds like pie in the sky stuff.

under the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth)

 

[Dexter]

under the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth)

Does this apply to the USA? or only the UK and NZ

STATUTORY ENFORCEMENT
In Australia, a foreign judgment can be enforced by registering the judgment under Part 2 of the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) (the Act). The key points under the Act are:

• The Act operates in an administrative fashion and, subject to evidentiary requirements being satisfied, allows the judgment creditor to register the foreign judgment without the need to commence fresh proceedings in Australia.
• The judgment creditor is usually able to apply to enforce a foreign judgment on an ex partebasis or by naming the judgment debtor as a defendant in its application (without the need effect service of the application).
• The judgment debtor may make an application to set aside the registration of the foreign judgment under section 7 of the Act for reasons that include the judgment debtor having been denied natural justice; there having been fraud on the part of the judgment creditor; or the foreign judgment having been satisfied.
• The Act is based upon reciprocity of enforcement and to be enforceable, the foreign judgment must be issued by a country or court set out in the Foreign Judgments Regulations 1992 (Cth) (the Regulations). For example, the United States of America (USA) is not listed in the Regulations, meaning a judgment from an American court is not enforceable under the Act.
• The foreign judgment sought to be enforced under the Act must be a "money judgment" (defined under section 1 of the Act as foreign judgments under which money is payable) of the superior courts and some inferior courts of certain foreign countries. Certain "non-money judgments" issued by New Zealand courts may also be enforced under the Act

and then there is this, all too hard for this poster


The USA and Australia have long enjoyed a close relationship, so it is somewhat surprising that they have not made a bilateral arrangement for the enforcement of each other's judgments. Countries with weaker connections to Australia have made bilateral arrangements allowing them to enjoy the benefits of the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) when it comes to enforcing judgments of their domestic courts in Australia.

A party seeking to enforce a US judgment in Australia must instead rely on the common law principles for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. The good news is that the common law requirements are at least reasonably settled.

What US judgments can be enforced in Australia?

To be capable of enforcement in Australia, a US judgment must satisfy six requirements:

• it must be final and conclusive;
• there must be an identity of the parties;
• if it is a judgment in personam, it must be for a fixed debt or readily calculable sum;
• the US court must have exercised jurisdiction in the international sense as recognised by Australian courts;
• it must not be wholly satisfied; and
• it must have been obtained within the last 12 years.

To enforce a US judgment in Australia the plaintiff must prove that the US court exercised jurisdiction over the judgment debtor which is recognised by Australian courts. This is often called "jurisdiction in the international sense".

Under Australian common law rules a US court will be deemed to have exercised the relevant jurisdiction if:

• the defendant voluntarily submitted to the court's jurisdiction; or
• the defendant was ordinarily resident or present in the US at the time that he or she was served with the originating process.

Conclusion

Although there is no treaty between the USA and Australia concerning the enforcement of judgments, US money judgments can be enforced in Australia under the common law procedure.

To maximise the prospects of being able to enforce a US judgment in Australia, US attorneys may wish to consider obtaining legal advice from Australian lawyers at an early stage in the US proceedings. Enforcement strategy is often an afterthought in litigation, but in our experience you can save time and costs by developing your enforcement strategy at the beginning of a case.

 

[Broncapz]

I can't be the only one that thinks 1.6million is a completely ludicrous amount of money to be paying. It just seems like greed on behalf of the victim's lawyers.

There is a difference between justice and revenge.

 

[Morkel]

I can't be the only one that thinks 1.6million is a completely ludicrous amount of money to be paying. It just seems like greed on behalf of the victim's lawyers.

There is a difference between justice and revenge.

You're not the only one. But this is America, where Litigation is akin to winning the lottery.

On top of that, Lodge did not appear in court to defend himself, so the victims were essentially able to name their dollar figure, unopposed. Looking at the legal ramifications, Lodge being absent may actually help his case (it may have even been a deliberate tactic, as opposed to simply avoiding the situation), as attending the hearing would have legitimised his involvement in the civil suit and therefore making him a willing party in the result. As it stands, Lodge being absent may make it more difficult or even impossible for them to have the result upheld and enforced by Australian counterparts. Sort of.

 

[Broncs_Fan]

Man that bitch journalist Jessican Halloran saying he shouldn't be allowed to play because he hasn't started paying the US civil order. Such a grandstander who hasn't really thought out her position as to whether over $1m is a reasonable amount of compensation?

Maybe she could begin by asking whether you'd get over $1m for the same thing in Australia. NO CHANCE.

 

[Foordy]

Man that bitch journalist Jessican Halloran saying he shouldn't be allowed to play because he hasn't started paying the US civil order. Such a grandstander who hasn't really thought out her position as to whether over $1m is a reasonable amount of compensation?

Maybe she could begin by asking whether you'd get over $1m for the same thing in Australia. NO CHANCE.

That's because Judges in this country are weak as piss

 

[Accept]

Man that bitch journalist Jessican Halloran saying he shouldn't be allowed to play because he hasn't started paying the US civil order. Such a grandstander who hasn't really thought out her position as to whether over $1m is a reasonable amount of compensation?

Maybe she could begin by asking whether you'd get over $1m for the same thing in Australia. NO CHANCE.

That has absolutely no relevance because he committed his crimes in the US. A NRL career is his only chance of paying his debts, he won't be able to do it digging ditches or working as a removalist. Lodge will always be a controversial figure and the rest of his life will be a real struggle for him.

 

[Broncs_Fan]

That's because Judges in this country are weak as piss

That's not true. There's laws capping damages and for what you can claim them for. Judges operate within the framework of the law. They don't have discretion to do whatever they like.

 

[Jason Simmons]

You're not the only one. But this is America, where Litigation is akin to winning the lottery.

On top of that, Lodge did not appear in court to defend himself, so the victims were essentially able to name their dollar figure, unopposed. Looking at the legal ramifications, Lodge being absent may actually help his case (it may have even been a deliberate tactic, as opposed to simply avoiding the situation), as attending the hearing would have legitimised his involvement in the civil suit and therefore making him a willing party in the result. As it stands, Lodge being absent may make it more difficult or even impossible for them to have the result upheld and enforced by Australian counterparts. Sort of.

Bump, bow...

the US court must have exercised jurisdiction in the international sense as recognised by Australian courts

That is why the victims lawyer is bleating publicly rather than simply instructing Australian lawyers and having this judgement recognised and enforced within Australia...

 

[Foordy]

That's not true. There's laws capping damages and for what you can claim them for.

doesn't stop judges being weak has piss.

 

[Broncs_Fan]

I'm sure Lodge has had legal advice on this. He isn't paying because it isn't enforceable here. If it was enforceable, you'd presume the US lawyers would have engaged Australian lawyers to enforce it here.

 

[Broncs_Fan]

This renewed witch hunt (predictable given it's close to the season) is a bit off to me. Lodge has taken his punishment in the criminal proceedings. He's done everything the NRL has asked of him.

American damages can be outrageous. If it was $40m would people still expect him to pay it? (For example a guy who spied on an American sports reporter through her hotel room key hole was ordered to pay over $40m in damages)

 

[Cult]

Is it possible that he isn't paying because he's barely earning anything? He has a child to look after now and is on a small contract.

 

[Foordy]

I'm sure Lodge has had legal advice on this. He isn't paying because it isn't enforceable here. If it was enforceable, you'd presume the US lawyers would have engaged Australian lawyers to enforce it here.

It is not as clear cut as you seem to think. but before it does become enforceable, the victims need to get on a plane and get an enforcement order from an Australian court.

If they've done the trial properly, then that order will likely have been granted ... if not then maybe they can get their 1.6 million by suing their lawyers for malpractice (or whatever it is called in the legal profession) ... hell, maybe they can just re-file and do it properly this time.

but one thing is for sure... this isn't over yet, regardless of how many people want it to be.

and if they do try to get an enforcement order, then maybe he should show up this time and actually fight it

 

[Foordy]

This renewed witch hunt (predictable given it's close to the season) is a bit off to me. Lodge has taken his punishment in the criminal proceedings. He's done everything the NRL has asked of him.

American damages can be outrageous. If it was $40m would people still expect him to pay it? (For example a guy who spied on an American sports reporter through her hotel room key hole was ordered to pay over $40m in damages)

well then he should have committed those crimes in a country where civil damages aren't as high