Petrusevski v Bulldogs Rugby League Club Limited [2004] FCA 1712

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Petrusevski v Bulldogs Rugby League Club Limited [2004] FCA 1712 ROBERT PETRUSEVSKI AND ROBERT SPIRKOVSKI v BULLDOGS RUGBY LEAGUE CLUB LIMITED ACN 001 869 405 N 962 OF 2002 GYLES J 15 DECEMBER 2004 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 962 OF 2002

BETWEEN: ROBERT PETRUSEVSKI

FIRST APPLICANT

ROBERT SPIRKOVSKI

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: BULLDOGS RUGBY LEAGUE CLUB LIMITED ACN 001 869 405

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: GYLES J

DATE OF ORDER: 15 DECEMBER 2004

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

The respondent releases the applicants from all prior orders made by the Court that the applicants pay the respondent's costs.

AND THE COURT ORDERS THAT: Orders are made in accordance with the draft Short Minutes of Order omitting Orders 6 and 7.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 962 OF 2002

BETWEEN: ROBERT PETRUSEVSKI

FIRST APPLICANT

ROBERT SPIRKOVSKI

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: BULLDOGS RUGBY LEAGUE CLUB LIMITED

ACN 001 869 405

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: GYLES J

DATE: 15 DECEMBER 2004

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for approval pursuant to s 33V of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (the Act) of the settlement of a proceeding brought pursuant to Pt IVA of the Act and for consequential orders which are set out in Short Minutes of Order which I initialled and dated 15 December 2004. 2 There are two named applicants, Robert Petrusevski and Robert Spirkovski. The respondent is Bulldogs Rugby League Club Limited (Bulldogs). The proceedings were commenced on behalf of the applicants and other group members who are alleged to have suffered financial loss caused by the conduct of the Bulldogs in allegedly making a representation that the Bulldogs was properly eligible to field a team in the 2002 National Rugby League (NRL) Premiership which would entitle the Bulldogs to the sporting and commercial benefits attached to competition points. The representation allegedly arose from various things said and not said by the Bulldogs on or before 19 August 2002. The representation was allegedly false because of alleged breaches by the Bulldogs of the salary cap imposed by the NRL for the 2002 competition. The alleged salary cap breaches and other alleged conduct by the Bulldogs allegedly caused the NRL to strip the Bulldogs of all of its competition points, placing it last in the competition. Such conduct allegedly caused loss to the applicants and other group members who had placed bets on the competition, for which the applicants seek damages and other relief on behalf of themselves and the group members. The Bulldogs denied some of these allegations and defended the proceedings. 3 There have been various interlocutory steps and the proceeding is set down for hearing of certain final issues before Branson J on 21 February 2005. 4 On 5 November 2004 the parties attended a formal mediation by Mr Andrew Rogers QC. At that time 59 persons had been identified as a member of the relevant group in addition to the two named applicants. The solicitors for the applicants acted for each of those persons. All but two of those persons have provided direct evidence of the bets which had been placed. The total established bets outlaid amounted to $393,656. The essence of the settlement is that the Bulldogs will pay $200,000 together with payment of the applicants' costs of the proceedings as agreed or, if not agreed, as taxed on a party/party basis. 5 It was proposed that if the number of group members remained the same, the $200,000 would be disbursed as follows: (a) The first applicant is to receive the full amount of his bets totalling $1650.