Rush v WA Amateur Football Club League (Inc)

The plaintiff, Peter Rush, an amateur football player and coach, sought an interlocutory injunction against the Western Australian Amateur Football League (Inc) (the League) to restrain it from enforcing a decision to suspend him for 10 years from participating in amateur football. The League had suspended Rush following an incident during a match in which a player on Rush's team had struck an umpire. Rush was suspended despite his lack of knowledge of the player's prior misconduct and his assertion that he had no idea that the player was under suspension. The League's Management Committee had reached the decision to suspend Rush without following its own rules, which required charges to be heard and determined by a Disputes Tribunal. Templeman J found that there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the League's by-laws entitled the Management Committee to discipline Rush without following its own rules. Templeman J also found that there was a serious question to be tried as to whether the League's decision to suspend Rush constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade. Templeman J found that damages would not be an adequate remedy for Rush, as the loss of enjoyment of playing football could not easily be compensated in money. The balance of convenience favoured Rush, as it would be unjust to deny him the opportunity to play and coach pending trial if he was to prove successful. Templeman J therefore granted Rush an interlocutory injunction to restrain the League from enforcing the decision until trial.