The Age journalist Jake Niall’s alleged ‘repercussions’ warning to Glen Bartlett revealed in court documents

Court documents have revealed the alleged threats made against former Melbourne president by a senior football journalist which related to a withdrawn invitation.

Senior football journalist Jake Niall warned former Melbourne president Glen Bartlett he would face “repercussions” over a decision to ban Age colleague Caroline Wilson from attending a club media breakfast.

The alleged threat, which lawyers for Bartlett say was carried out, is detailed in a statement of claim lodged by the former Demons boss in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

Niall was in the Melbourne Cricket Club committee room at the MCG in September 2018 when he allegedly warned Bartlett that his decision to disinvite Wilson from the event would not end well for him.

Bartlett is suing Niall, Wilson, The Age and Nine Entertainment over a series of articles published about the club’s change of leadership during its 2021 premiership season.

The 66-page statement of claim reveals Bartlett was on the brink of a $20 million business deal when The Age articles were written.

But the sale of Bartlett’s law firm was derailed as a result of “the negative media reports

surrounding the plaintiff standing down as MFC president”, his lawyers allege.

“The first and second defendants (Wilson and Niall) had demonstrated an animus towards the plaintiff (Bartlett), at least from when the plaintiff had uninvited the first defendant

from a MFC sponsors’ breakfast during Grand Final week in 2018,” the statement of claim asserts.

“At the breakfast … the second defendant (Niall) foreshadowed retribution against the plaintiff saying words to him to the effect that there would be repercussions for his actions from the first and second defendants and the media organisations they worked for.

“(Niall) said to the plaintiff …. words to the effect that banning the first defendant from speaking at the breakfast was a bad idea and that this was now not going to go well for the plaintiff with respect to the first defendant as a senior journalist.

“The plaintiff understood and perceived the nature and circumstances of the publication of the defamatory publications complained of herein as constituting the defendants effectively making good on the statements …”

Glen Barlett and Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin.

A view pushed in the aftermath of Bartlett’s sudden exit as Melbourne president in April 2021 was that he had lost the support of the football department and most board members after he had publicly lambasted the team during a 2020 form slump.

But it has since been revealed that from late 2020 until his departure, there had been a major disagreement between Bartlett and other senior club figures, including CEO Gary Pert, regarding concerns about alleged bullying and behavioural issues involving senior coach Simon Goodwin.

In February 2021, the board even considered standing Goodwin down amid secret crisis talks with AFL chiefs.

Goodwin has repeatedly denied having any behavioural issues.

Bartlett had been re-elected unopposed for another 12-month term just weeks before his exit.

The ex-Demons boss broke his silence on his murky departure last year, claiming he had been thwarted in his fight to keep Melbourne free of “workplace bullying, gambling, harassment and illegal drugs”.

Caroline Wilson.

Jake Niall.

Bartlett alleged that he and his partner had since been subjected to “threats, deceitful conduct and a public campaign to discredit us”.

He has launched separate legal action against current Melbourne president Kate Roffey and three other Demons directors.

In the claim against Niall, Wilson, The Age and Nine, Bartlett’s lawyers allege a May 2021 article in The Age “alluded to a commercial deal which would change the circumstances of the plaintiff’s professional life and businesses”.

“This information had only been shared with senior members of the MFC executive and some board members and the plaintiff had expressly asked for it to be kept confidential, due to the serious ramifications any negative publicity concerning the plaintiff could have …

“The defendants were aware of the plaintiff’s profession and specialisation and that the defamatory publications would strike at the heart of that reputation …

“The best estimate that the plaintiff can currently provide concerning the value of the Merger Transaction is that it is worth in the vicinity of $AUD15 million to $AUD20 million.”

According to the statement of claim, another Age article in February last year was “meant and was understood to mean” that Bartlett had acted “disloyally” and “deceitfully” in arranging, “independently of the MFC board, a meeting with the AFL about Mr Goodwin and the CEO of the MFC, Mr Gary Pert”.

It asserts that “the defendants, knowing that they were publishing material adverse to the

Plaintiff … failed to take any … adequate steps to attempt to verify the veracity of those defamatory allegations”.

Mediation in the case is expected to held in the coming weeks.

The Age editor Patrick Elligett told the Herald Sun: “We stand by our reporting and are defending this case strongly. Our journalist denies Mr Bartlett’s claims.”