• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

ICL sues for restraint of trade

Shri

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I don't think anything positive is going to come out of this for the ICL. The players who played ICL should support this move for it to be effective. All players have been given an opportunity to play domestic cricket and possibly even the IPL now and I doubt any player is going to jeopardize his chance of earning money by being involved in this.

I don't know much about the stuff the ECB has done against the ICL so can't comment on that part.
 

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
I wouldn't be suprised if the ECB get in a lot of trouble over this. I'm no expert in the legal side of things, but I would have thought their behaviour could be argued to be attempting to restrain trade and also intimidatory.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't think anything positive is going to come out of this for the ICL. The players who played ICL should support this move for it to be effective. All players have been given an opportunity to play domestic cricket and possibly even the IPL now and I doubt any player is going to jeopardize his chance of earning money by being involved in this.
That's why their identities are protected tbf.

In any case, they'd get in even more **** if they tried to use their position regarding the IPL and county structure to discourage industrial action.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No expert obviously but I don't quite understand how those behind the ICL are suing for restraint of trade; I'd have thought it was the players that would do that. I'd have though those behind the ICL would sue for indictment to break contract.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I'm also not entirely sure how the ECB apparently barred any players from county cricket; that was very obviously and deliberately not done because everyone knew full well that that would land a lot of people in a lot of trouble.
 

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
No expert obviously but I don't quite understand how those behind the ICL are suing for restraint of trade; I'd have thought it was the players that would do that. I'd have though those behind the ICL would sue for indictment to break contract.
I think, if I understand right, both the ICL and the players are sueing. It's just that the players aren't named individually to protect them.
 

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
No expert obviously but I don't quite understand how those behind the ICL are suing for restraint of trade; I'd have thought it was the players that would do that. I'd have though those behind the ICL would sue for indictment to break contract.
It will be a very long and complicated claim. There will be various allegations of interference with the ICL's contractual rights. The ICL may not itself have a claim based directly on restraint of trade, but the fact that there has been unlawful activity of that sort may well be a component of various of the other claims made by the ICL. The players themselves (whose anonymity will not be able to be safeguarded, I'm sure) will have claims more directly based on restraint of trade.

I wouldn't want to predict with confidence who'll win this. I suppose the likeliest outcome is some kind of out of court settlement. But I'm surprised it's taken this long for the ICL and the players to sue - it was a claim waiting to happen.
 

brockley

International Captain
Has a much better chance against india and the icc,icl players we're never barred from playing county cricket.
And vikram solanki played for england A last year and chris read hong kong 6's.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
It will be a very long and complicated claim. There will be various allegations of interference with the ICL's contractual rights. The ICL may not itself have a claim based directly on restraint of trade, but the fact that there has been unlawful activity of that sort may well be a component of various of the other claims made by the ICL. The players themselves (whose anonymity will not be able to be safeguarded, I'm sure) will have claims more directly based on restraint of trade.

I wouldn't want to predict with confidence who'll win this. I suppose the likeliest outcome is some kind of out of court settlement. But I'm surprised it's taken this long for the ICL and the players to sue - it was a claim waiting to happen.
Yup, each of those thoughts had gone through my less-legally-educated-than-yours head.

I guess who "wins" will depend on all sorts of things - as we've all noted before, unlike in the 1970s with the boards vs. Packer, officials haven't just dashed in and acted without consulting legal counsel and they'll only have done what they've done believing they're on safe ground. Equally those behind the ICL, and players, clearly wouldn't bother trying to sue if they hadn't been assured they had a chance.

Both sides can just sit tight and hope. Any idea how long this might take? My guess can only be "a while".
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
No expert obviously but I don't quite understand how those behind the ICL are suing for restraint of trade; I'd have thought it was the players that would do that. I'd have though those behind the ICL would sue for indictment to break contract.
UIMM, the ICL is suing on behalf of the players.

If you're an Indian cricketer who's taken advantage of the BCCI's amnesty and returned to official cricket, the last thing you'd want to do would be to piss off the BCCI by taking part in a lawsuit against them.
 

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
UIMM, the ICL is suing on behalf of the players.
The ICL wouldn't be able to sue on behalf of anyone else. The claim brought by the ICL can only be a claim brought in its own right.

My understanding is that certain players are also claimants in the case along with the ICL, but these players haven't yet been named. I suspect that this is a failing on the part of the news reporters rather than it being a case of the players being anonymised in the litigation because a claim brought by anonymous individuals would simply be struck out by the court.
 

Top