Matter Number Parties Charges Decision Key Words
AT 18-04- Sydney United 58 Football Club v Football NSW; Rockdale City Suns Football Club

Sydney United 58 Football Club appealed on the following grounds:
1. a party was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to present its case;
2. lack or excess of jurisdiction of a Body or a Member Appeals Committee;
3. the decision was one that was not reasonably open to a Body or a Member Appeals Committee having regard to the evidence before the Body or the Member Appeals Committee;
4. severity re a fine of $3,000 or more.

The appeal is dismissed with the consequence that the GPT Determination is confirmed. With regards to the grounds of appeal, the AT found that;
1. the FNSW GPT had afforded SU a reasonable opportunity to present its case;
2. the FNSW GPT did have jurisdiction to hear the matter;
3. the only evidence before the GPT of the cost of repairs to the cloth shade sale was that adduced on behalf of RCS. In these circumstances, the GPT Determination was not only reasonably open to it but was the only conclusion available to it on the evidence; and
4. as the GPT Determination requiring SU to compensate RCS for the damage caused to the Ground as a consequence of a breach of section 19 of the FNSW Regulations is not a fine, there is no foundation for the engagement of the severity ground of appeal.pose a Club Sanction of “cost of repair/replace property & equipment”.

AT 18-03 The Entrance Bateau Bay Football Club v Central Coast Football

The Entrance Bateau Bay Football CLub (TEBBFC) appealed on the following grounds:
1. the decision of a Body or a Member Appeals Committee was affected by actual bias; and
2. severity.

The orders of the Appeals Tribunal are as follows:
1. the appeal by TEBBFC is upheld;
2. the determination of the CCAFT dated 6 July 2018 is quashed; and
3. the determination of the GPT dated 21 June 2018 is reinstated.

AT 18-03 Shannon Hall v Central Coast Football

Shannon Hall appealed to the Appeals Tribunal (AT) on the following grounds:
1. the decision was not reasonably open to a body or a Member Appeals Committee having regard to the evidence before the body or Member Appeals Committee; and
2. severity.

The orders of the AT are as follows:
1. The AT does not find that the first ground of appeal was made out;
2. The AT does find that on the ground of appeal of severity has been made out. Therefore, the following orders have been made by the AT:
a. Mr Hall will be suspended from playing, managing or coaching football for a period of nine months from 17 June 2018 (i.e. until 17 March 2019);
b. Mr Hall be placed on a good behaviour bond of eighteen months, such bond to commence on 17 March 2019; and,
c. Any breach of the bond to result in a suspension from all football related activity for a period of twelve months from the date of the breach.

AT 18-01 George Kulscar v SDFA

Mr Kulscar appealed to the Appeals Tribunal (AT) on the following grounds:
1. the decision of a Body or a Member Appeals Committee was affected by actual bias;
2. a party was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to present its case; and,
3. the decision was one that was not reasonably open to a Body or Member Appeals Committee having regard to the evidence before the Body or Member Appeals Committee.

1. The Appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
- The AT has no jurisdiction to review a determination of the Board of SNSWF. Its jurisdiction is relevantly limited to hearing and determining appeals from a “Member Appeals Committee".
- The AT does not have jurisdiction to hear the the appeal from the decision of the SDFA DT because Mr Kulscar has not exhausted his appeal rights under the SDFA Regulations.
- The AT strongly urges the SDFA permit Mr Kulscar to lodge an appeal to the SDFA Appeals Tribunal and Mr Kulscar should be at liberty to pursue any rights of appeal from any determination of the SDFA Appeal Tribunal, if lodged, to the SNSWF Appeal Tribunal.

Search Again

FOOTBALL NSW ASSOCIATIONS