Taylor v McLachlan and others

Cats may recall this case – a fan suing the AFL over the AFLgate scandal.

Melbourne lawyer Jackson Taylor has lodged a writ against outgoing AFL chairman Mike Fitzpatrick and chief executive Gillon McLachlan, alleging acts of deceptive or misleading conduct during Essendon’s supplements saga.

On Friday I got sent the Statement of Claim.

AND THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMS:
A   Declarations that:
(1) by making the McLachlan Representations, Gillon McLachlan engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (Victoria)
(2) by making the Fitzpatrick Representations, Michael Fitzpatrick engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (Victoria)
(3) by making the AFL Representations, the AFL engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (Victoria).
B Injunctions against each Defendant pursuant to section 232(1) of the Australian Consumer Law (Victoria) requiring them jointly to publish corrective advertising in respect of each of their respective contraventions of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (Victoria).
C Costs.
D Such further or other orders as the Court deems just.

This is going to be interesting to watch.

As an aside – I recently met a very senior member of the former Abbott government and we got to talking about AFLgate. The individual had the cheek to ask to me, “What was the AFL thinking when they went down that path?” Simply astonishing. The former Abbott government could have, at any time, ordered ASADA to fully comply with the inquiries being made by former Senator John Madigan. In fact, it could have launched an investigation itself.  Furthermore the Liberals in the Senate voted against having a Parliamentary inquiry into the whole saga.

This entry was posted in AFLgate. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Taylor v McLachlan and others

  1. Strayan Drongo

    Sync are you trying to tie Abbott to this also? Hahaha He really gets you down huh.

  2. Art Vandelay

    In fact, the Liberals in the Senate voted against having a Parliamentary inquiry into the whole saga.

    Of course. The Liberals do the bidding of the bureaucracy.

  3. Suburban Boy

    I have doubts about whether Mr Taylor has standing to bring this action, but I wish him the best of luck with it in any case.

  4. Aussieute

    @ Suburban Boy can you expand on your reason as to why the following has no standing ?

    1 The Plaintiff is and was at all times material to this proceeding:
    1.1 a person for the purpose of section 232(2) of the Australian Consumer Law (Victoria) (the Law); and
    1.2 a consumer of goods and/or services supplied by or under licence from the Third Defendant (the AFL) and/or its affiliate

  5. Tim Neilson

    Aussieute
    #2386242, posted on May 21, 2017 at 7:51 pm
    a consumer of goods and/or services supplied by or under licence from the Third Defendant (the AFL) and/or its affiliate
    Hmm, interesting, can the AFL be sued by anyone who pays to get into the games? Couldn’t happen to a nicer crowd of rent-seeking virtue signalling self-adulators.

  6. Docket62 (deplorable)

    Pity its not a class action. Id be in on that!

  7. John Comnenus

    The Courts and the AFL will find a way to bury this case. There is no way the courts want to discredit the AFL or ASADA. You can hear the shutters coming down on this already.

    A quick scan reveals some pretty strong allegations in this claim including fraud. I wish him luck with his claim. What happened to Essendon insulted the very notion of procedural fairness. The fix was in, they just had to find a body that would deliver the right verdict and so they went to WADA’s pet ‘court’ in Switzerland. They had to shop the case all over the world but they finally got their verdict.

  8. Mundi

    This case seems really strange and even if they won, since it’s under trade laws, wouldn’t the punishment just be something like “anyone who purchased Essendon tickets gets partial refund”??

  9. Sir Red Robbo

    Who cares?

    To suggest that the gummint should spend/waste time, effort and taxpayers’ money on any sport as wealthy as the AFL is idiotic.

    Other than upholding the rule of law via a legal and justice system that works and is fair, so that aggrieved parties can pursue their contractual rights at their own expense, the various governments should have nothing to do with elite sport. Or drugs in sport.

  10. If he hasn’t got any big financial backers to fund the case yet, it is just piss and wind.

  11. Suburban Boy

    @ Aussieute: I have doubts that being a consumer of the AFL’s services, without anything more, can constitute standing in a case in which the AFL is accused of breaching of the law. The matter would be different if Jackson could point to some loss to himself that resulted from the breaches he alleges, but I can’t see anything like that in the statement of claim.
    Perhaps Jackson will argue that the damage to the integrity of the competition caused by the alleged breaches diminished the value and enjoyment he received from the AFL’s services – or at least something of that general sort – but I doubt that such an argument would be accepted as providing him with standing.
    I’m not saying the case is hopeless, only that Jackson faces a big hurdle just to get the court to hear it, and obviously the AFL will throw everything at the question of standing to ensure that the allegations don’t even get an airing.

Comments are closed.