The Denny Solomona transfer: Why did Castleford settle and does the case set a new precedent?

Published 29 June 2017 By: James Hill

Rugby player in suit on field

The High Court action brought by Castleford Tigers against Denny Solomona, Sale Sharks and Andrew Clarke (Solomona’s agent) in relation to Solomona’s contentious move from Castleford to Sale has been settled.

In a remarkably detailed statement, Castleford has disclosed that the settlement figure is in excess of £200,000 and it is to recover approximately £100,000 in legal costs.  The statement also sets out additional detail about the background to the matter[1].  It should be noted that neither Solomona, Sale Sharks nor Clarke have released any statement of their own.  However, one would assume the decision to settle was led and underwritten by Sale.

Back in January 2017, the author wrote an article for LawInSport examining the key legal issues arising out of the Solomona case (available here)[2].  This article re-visits these issues in light of the settlement and Castleford’s statement.  Specifically it looks at:

  • Was there a breach of contract and an inducement to breach contract?

  • Why did Castleford decide to settle the case?

  • Does the case set a new precedent?

 

Get access to this article and all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport

Register here

Already a member?

Username or email   Password   Remember Me     Forgot Login?  

Articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts

 

Related Articles

Author

James Hill

James Hill

James Hill is an Associate at Onside Law. James works on a broad range of commercial disputes, including High Court claims and arbitration, as well as a variety of regulatory matters. In particular, James has experience of obtaining injunctive relief against employees for breach of contract and theft of confidential information.

  • This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.