Sponsors a new law front for Israel Folau

Rugby Australia may have inadvertently opened another legal avenue for Israel Folau to pursue.

Israel Folau and his wife Maria wait in the foyer at Uniting Church for the Assemblies of God congregation in Kenthurst, Sydney. Picture: Jane Dempster

Rugby Australia may have inadvertently opened another legal avenue for Israel Folau to pursue following suggestions that sponsors were threatening to withdraw support if the former Wallaby player wasn’t sacked.

Senior legal figures have said that, if true, the comments made by Rugby Australia chairman Cameron Clyne give rise to not only a common law claim of ­interference with contractual ­relations, but also to a potential breach of competition law.

After Rugby Australia and Folau failed to reach agreement through a Fair Work Commission conciliation hearing on Friday, Mr Clyne said the sport’s governing body had no option but to sack the 30-year-old.

“(The alternative] would be that we’d have no sponsors at all because no sponsor has indicated they would be willing to be ­associated with social media posts of that sort, and that ­includes government, because we’ve also heard from them,” he said. “We would also potentially be in litigation with employees who are gay and who would say we’re not providing a workplace that is safe or respectful.”

MORE: Janet Albrechtsen writes: Alan Joyce may find himself cross-examined in the witness box by Israel Folau’s crack legal team | Folau’s Sunday sermon: Steely Folau ready for ‘real warfare’ | Nick Cater writes: Folau’s case exemplifies the trend to turn to the law to impose conformity | Twitter trolls: Folau leaps to Magda Szubanski’s defence

Sydney barrister Jeffrey Phillips SC, who specialises in ­employment law, told The Australian that, having read Mr Clyne’s comments, there was a real possibility of another legal avenue for Folau’s team. He suggested that if Rugby Australia breached its contract with Folau by sacking him, then sponsors induced that breach of contract.

“If it be the case that sponsors, or even the government, has placed any pressure on Rugby Australia to terminate his contract, then that raises prospects of interference with contractual relations and aspects of Australian competition and consumer law, in particular, section 45D dealing with secondary boycotts,” he said. “For example, if Party A places pressure on Party B to stop Party C providing services to Party D, that is a secondary boycott. This is not too dissimilar to when renegade trade unions like the CFMEU placed pressure on employers not to engage with contractors who have non-union labour.”

Mr Clyne did, however, rubbish suggestions Rugby Australia had been dictated to by main sponsor Qantas in the lead-up to Folau’s termination. “That’s simply wrong,” he said. “Sponsors have a right to associate themselves with a game they feel best represents their values, but it is absolute nonsense to suggest it was done at the behest of a sponsor. Having said that, I haven’t had any sponsor come forward and say they were happy with the post or happy to be associated with it.”

Folau had his $4 million contract terminated in May over his Instagram posts, including one proclaiming hell awaits “drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolaters”.

A panel ruled that Folau was guilty of a “high-level breach” of the players’ code of conduct.

Folau, who has since used ­social media sparingly, yesterday took to Twitter to defend gay rights activist and actor Magda Szubanski. “I totally agree with @bairdjulia — please stop the anonymous online attacks on @MagdaSzubanski who has entered this debate very respectfully,” he wrote. “

She is entitled to express her views — let’s all have this important discussion with love in our hearts.” Folau referenced journalist Julia Baird, who was calling out the “ugly hate campaign” against Szubanski after she announced a rival GoFundMe page called For Love.