Canterbury Bankstown Rugby League Football Club Ltd v Rogers; Bugden v Rogers

The case of *Canterbury Bankstown Rugby League Football Club Ltd v Rogers; Bugden v Rogers* [1993] NSWCA 49 was heard in the New South Wales Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned the enforceability of certain agreements entered into between the Canterbury Bankstown Rugby League Football Club Ltd (the Club) and its former players, Mr Rogers and Mr Bugden. The players sought to enforce these agreements, which they contended entitled them to certain payments and benefits.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the agreements constituted a restraint of trade that was void as against public policy, and if so, whether the restraint could be severed from the remainder of the agreements. The Court also had to consider whether the agreements were otherwise valid and enforceable in law.

The Court of Appeal found that the agreements contained covenants that imposed an unreasonable restraint on the players' ability to pursue their profession. Applying established principles of contract law regarding restraints of trade, the Court determined that these covenants were void as against public policy because they went beyond what was reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the Club. The Court then considered whether the offending clauses could be severed from the rest of the agreements. Ultimately, the Court held that the restraints were not severable and that the agreements, as a whole, were unenforceable.