BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
High Court of Ireland Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> High Court of Ireland Decisions >> Dundalk AFC Interim Co. Ltd. v. FAI National League [2000] IEHC 57; [2001] 1 IR 434 (2nd May, 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2000/57.html Cite as: [2000] IEHC 57, [2001] 1 IR 434 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
1. The
First named Defendant (“the league”) consists of two divisions, the
Premier Division and the First Division. At the end of the 1999/2000 season
the bottom two clubs in the Premier Division will be relegated to the First
Division and the top two teams in the First Division promoted to the Premier
Division. The third last team in the Premier Division and the third team in
the First Division will play off, the winner being in the Premier Division for
the next season and the loser in the First Division. In this action it is
sought to establish whether the Plaintiff (“Dundalk”) or the Second
named Defendant (“Kilkenny”) has finished third in the First
Division and so is entitled to a place in the play off and the opportunity for
promotion to the Premier Division.
2. On
the 13th November, 1999 Kilkenny played Limerick and included in their team Mr.
Fran Carter. Mr. Carter had been signed by Kilkenny from Shelbourne F.C.
However, he had previously been a retained player with Galway United and it
appears that at the 13th November, 1999 Galway United considered him to be
still a retained player. The matter came to the attention of the league and a
meeting was arranged for the league’s premises on the 13th November, 1999
at which the attendance of Mr. Carter, Mr. Pat Byrne, Kilkenny’s manager
and Mr. James Rhatigan, Kilkenny’s secretary/general manager was
requested. Mr. Rhatigan did not in fact attend the meeting but Mr. Christopher
Bateman, Kilkenny’s representative on the league’s management
committee represented the club in his place. The letter summoning Kilkenny to
the meeting is dated 22nd November, 1999 and is in the following terms:-
3. When
the representatives of Kilkenny attended for the meeting they were met by Mr.
Michael Hyland, the Honorary Chairman of the league and Mr. Donal Crowther,
Executive Secretary of the league. At the meeting the circumstances of Mr.
Carter’s transfer were explained and discussed. Mr. Carter was then
asked to put his name and address on a blank sheet of paper. Mr. Hyland then
informed the Kilkenny representatives that the signature on the registration
form was not that of the player. Mr. Pat Byrne frankly admitted that he had
signed the transfer form with Mr. Carter’s name and said that he was
authorised to do so.
4. Following
that meeting Mr. Hyland and Mr. Crowther consulted with Mr. Menton, the
Honorary Secretary of the league and as a result a decision was reached which
was communicated to Kilkenny by letter dated 1st December, 1999 in the
following terms:-
5. The
response of Kilkenny to this letter was to institute proceedings entitled The
High Court 1999 No. 12838p Kilkenny City Football Club Limited Plaintiff and
Donal Crowther Defendant, the defendant being the nominee of the league. A
Notice of Motion was issued returnable for the 21st February, 2000 the
principal relief sought being an Order restoring to Kilkenny the three points
deducted. At that stage the action was compromised on terms that all issues in
dispute between the parties should be referred to an arbitrator to be agreed
between the parties. The parties agreed on Mr. Milo Corcoran as arbitrator.
The arbitration hearing took place on the 13th April, 2000 and Mr. Corcoran
gave his decision on that evening. His decision was that the match between
Kilkenny and Limerick should be replayed. The match was replayed, Kilkenny
winning the same and so they regained the three points which had been deducted.
6. The
position now is that Kilkenny have finished in third place in the First
Division with Dundalk one point behind in fourth place.
7. The
Eircom league, Rule 16, deals with registration of players. The relevant
portions of the rule are as follows:-
8. Rule
16 does not provides for who is to make a decision under Rule 16(A)(vi).
Accordingly, this would appear to be a function of the management committee
under Rule 5. However, Rule 5 also provides that the honorary officers, that
is to say, the chairman, the honorary treasurer and the executive secretary of
the league shall have all the powers of the management committee in dealing
with matters under the jurisdiction of the league which may arise between the
board of control and/or management committee meetings. It would appear that in
the present case the matter purports to have been dealt with by the honorary
officers, two of whom attended the meeting with Kilkenny, the third being
consulted by them for the purposes of a decision. The penalty for a breach of
Rule 16 in terms of the forfeiture of three points is mandatory and there is no
discretion in the management committee or the honorary officers in relation to
the same. The rules contain no provision for the reference of disputes to
arbitration. Again, there is no provision for matches to be replayed in the
event of a breach of Rule 16 as an alternative to the forfeiture of three
points. In these circumstances if the honorary officers were correct in
finding that Kilkenny played a non-registered player then it was mandatory that
Kilkenny should forfeit three points: the reference to arbitration and the
carrying out of the direction of the arbitrator to replay the match are outside
the rules and are nullities. The rules of the league represent a contract
between the league and the teams playing in it and an arrangement made between
the league and one club playing in it cannot adversely affect the rights under
the rules of another club.
9. This
matter accordingly can be determined by examining whether or not Mr. Carter was
eligible to play as a properly registered player on the relevant date. If he
was eligible the three points deducted by the honorary officers should be
restored to Kilkenny.
10. Rule
16(A)(i) provides that to be eligible to play in a match a player must be
properly registered. Rule 16(A)(ii) defines properly registered. A player is
properly registered when -
11. The
registration form was registered with the registration secretary. It is
necessary then to see if Mr. Carter signed the registration and form and if so
was the signature properly witnessed.
12. Both
Mr. Byrne and Mr. Carter in their Affidavits say that Mr. Byrne was authorised
to sign the registration form on Mr. Carter’s behalf and this is nowhere
contradicted. In
London
County Council -v- Vitamins Limited
,
(1955) 2 All ER 229, the Court had to consider the effect of clauses in tenancy
agreements which required certain notices to be signed. In his judgment Romer
LJ at page 232 said -
15. That
being the common law it is necessary to look at Rule 16(A)(ii) and see if in
its context or in its context within Rule 16(A) as a whole or in the rules as a
whole, the word should be construed as requiring a personal signature. I see
nothing in the context here which requires an exception to be made to the
common law rule. Accordingly, the registration form was signed by Mr. Carter.
16. As
to the witnessing of the signature of Mr. Fran Carter on the registration form,
no objection has been raised by the league or by Dundalk to the same but in the
interest of bringing finality to this matter I will deal briefly with the same.
In Re. Gibson, deceased, (1949) 2 All ER 90 at 91, Pearce J said -
17. A
party to a document cannot be a witness to his own signature. Mr. Byrne in his
representative capacity signed the registration form: as a matter of a law this
was a signing not by Mr. Byrne but by Mr. Carter. Mr. Byrne is not a party to
the registration form. In his personal capacity Mr. Byrne signed the form as
witness having (to use the words of Pearce J) being present at the incident,
namely, present when the form was signed by Mr. Carter. I take the view that
Mr. Byrne was entitled so to do and I have been unable to find any authority to
the contrary. It is not uncommon for a person who signs a deed in one capacity
to witness the signature of another party to the deed and this practice has
never been found to be ineffective. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the
signature of the registration form by Mr. Carter was properly witnessed.
18. Having
so found, I find that Mr. Carter was a properly registered player with Kilkenny
on the relevant date. No offence was committed by Kilkenny and there is no
basis upon which points could be deducted from them. Accordingly, I dismiss
the Plaintiff’s claim.