| Main Page
v NUFC - the verdict
Further Tribunal verdict published Wednesday 21.10.2009
NEWCASTLE UNITED FOOTBALL COMPANY LTD
In paragraph 54 of our Award dated 1 October 2009, we identified a number of consequential issues the determination of which we postponed in order that the parties could provide us with written submissions on those issues. We have since received detailed written submissions from the parties and, in this Supplementary Award, we set out our determination on those issues.
First, we conclude that there is no basis for altering our award of Ł2m plus interest in favour of Mr Keegan. Clause 14.8.1 of the Contract is not subject to mitigation, as the Club agreed at the hearing. It is subject only to Clause 14.8.5 which does not apply here since Mr Keegan is not employed by ESPN.
3. Secondly, we direct that interest should be paid by the Club from 4 September 2008 to the date of payment of the sum awarded of Ł2m in accordance with the rates set out in Appendix 2 to Mr Keegan’s Written Submissions dated 6 October 2009.
4. Thirdly, we direct that the Club should pay all of Mr Keegan’s costs. Although part of the hearing and preparation was taken up on the question of whether Clause 14.8.1 applied and, if not, what would be the appropriate measure of damages, this represented only a very small proportion of both. Mr Keegan succeeded on all other significant points. Moreover, we reject the Club’s attempt to rely on the various offers which it made both prior to and during the hearing to settle the claim since none of them involved the Club’s acceptance that he had been constructively dismissed and all of them involved a condition of secrecy or confidentiality.
5. Fourthly, we direct that the Club should pay Mr Keegan’s costs on an indemnity basis given the manner in which it conducted this litigation: its defence on the primary liability issue was, in our view, wholly without merit and it chose to make entirely unfounded allegations against Mr Keegan.
6. Fifthly, we direct that those costs should include the CFA uplifts and ATE insurance claimed by Mr Keegan.
7. Sixthly, we direct that the costs should, if possible, be agreed. In the absence of agreement, the Chairman of the Tribunal will assess the costs to be paid if asked by either party to do so.
8. Finally, we direct that the correct name of the Club should be recorded in our Award dated 1 October 2009 as “Newcastle United Football Company Limited”.
9. We also direct that this Supplementary Award, like the main Award, should be published in the same way, namely we direct that both the Premier League and the Club should publish it on their respective websites.
PHILIP HAVERS QC (CHAIRMAN)
20 October 2009
|Back to Main Page|