HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

Wtiga said:
ASIC regulates all companies limited by guarantee, including non-profits like HBG’s entities.
ASIC states explicitly that directors of non-profit companies have “the same legal duties and responsibilities as directors of other companies” — including s180, s181, s182, s183 and s191.
Liquor & Gaming NSW regulates club operations, but it does not replace or diminish ASIC’s jurisdiction over directors’ duties, misuse of position, conflicts of interest, or governance decisions causing corporate harm.


ASIC action against non-profit directors is common. The duties are not narrower — they are exactly the same under the Corporations Act.

ASIC has real, serious powers if it finds a breach of directors’ duties — and these powers apply equally to companies limited by guarantee (like HBG’s clubs) as they do to for-profit companies.

What ASIC can do if they find a breach​


Here’s the clean version:


✔ Disqualify HBG directors (ban from all boards)​


✔ Impose civil penalties​


✔ Order compensation​


✔ Enforce governance reforms​


✔ Appoint investigators/examiners​


✔ Refer to Liquor & Gaming NSW​


✔ Refer to NRL or Police where relevant​


And they do use these powers — especially with clubs and charities.
Click to expand...
Ok so let me grant you a world where ASIC is the sole interventionist for all clubs in Australia.

For the sake of argument, you've copy and pasted some AI, but you haven't identified which regulation they have breached to justify ASIC intervention.

That's what I want to know.
 
weststigers said:
Ok so let me grant you a world where ASIC is the sole interventionist for all clubs in Australia.

For the sake of argument, you've copy and pasted some AI, but you haven't identified which regulation they have breached to justify ASIC intervention.

That's what I want to know.
Click to expand...
Thats what asics are there to look for
 
weststigers said:
Ok so let me grant you a world where ASIC is the sole interventionist for all clubs is Australia.

For the sake of argument, you've copy and pasted some AI, but you haven't identified which regulation they have breached to justify ASIC intervention.

That's what I want to know.
Click to expand...
Mate - they intervene when directors breach there duties.
That's it.
Just because its a club, a business, a for profit.
They are not sole interventionist - i never said that.
I sait it is another angle for fans to use.
Directors have duties under Australian Law.
They have to protect and enhance the value of the entity they represent.
ASIC will determine if directors have breached.
If they have they fine them and suspend them.
 
Wtiga said:

​

What ASIC can do if they find a breach​

✔ Disqualify HBG directors (ban from all boards)​

✔ Impose civil penalties​

✔ Order compensation​

✔ Enforce governance reforms​

✔ Appoint investigators/examiners​

✔ Refer to Liquor & Gaming NSW​

✔ Refer to NRL or Police where relevant​


And they do use these powers — especially with clubs and charities.
Click to expand...
Nobody said they don't have power, but someone has to have done something wrong first. These powers are only used in extraordinary circumstances.
 
weststigers said:
Nobody said they don't have power, but someone has to have done something wrong first. These powers are only used in extraordinary circumstances.
Click to expand...
Yes - and the argument is - did the directors cause foreseeable harm to the Wests Tigers by sacking the entire board.
And no they are not in extraordinary circumstances.
I have sat on many boards and continue to do so.
Anyway mate - I'll leave it with you.
I would just appreciate you not persuading others not to do it when you do not know the law.
I have a letter that fans can use which is a 20 page letter with the breaches, which laws apply, what the facts are etc.
As i said you dont have to use it.
But its real.
 
Wtiga said:
Mate - they intervene when directors breach there duties.
That's it.
Just because its a club, a business, a for profit.
They are not sole interventionist - i never said that.
I sait it is another angle for fans to use.
Directors have duties under Australian Law.
They have to protect and enhance the value of the entity they represent.
ASIC will determine if directors have breached.
If they have they fine them and suspend them.
Click to expand...
It's something we can agree on. Directors have duties. We agree.

What duty are you accusing them of breaching?

Or are you saying you will just write a letter to ASIC requesting a general investigation and see if a breach is discovered?
 
weststigers said:
It's something we can agree on. Directors have duties. We agree.

What duty are you accusing them of breaching?

Or are you saying you will just write a letter to ASIC requesting a general investigation and see if a breach is discovered?
Click to expand...
no i have letter stating it relates to
  • s180
  • s181
  • s182
  • s183
The letter outlines it.
I am not going to paste the argument here for legal reasons.
I cannot share it on a public forum due to possible defamation.
I have seen HBG sue directors over the past 12 months.
My lawyer has said i can share it via email or DM.
That's it.
 
Wtiga said:
Yes - and the argument is - did the directors cause foreseeable harm to the Wests Tigers by sacking the entire board.
And no they are not in extraordinary circumstances.
I have sat on many boards and continue to do so.
Anyway mate - I'll leave it with you.
I would just appreciate you not persuading others not to do it when you do not know the law.
I have a letter that fans can use which is a 20 page letter with the breaches, which laws apply, what the facts are etc.
As i said you dont have to use it.
But its real.
Click to expand...
The answer is no.
Now in more interesting news, Who is playing 7 for us next year?
Doueihi was a good fill in at times but surely won’t be the primary?
 
hammertime said:
Teams are supposed to be united, and if you dont share the same vision, thats usually when people leave (i.e. galvin).

Thats the frustration from people on here. We need to be united towards winning under one banner, and for the most part, are.

HBG debenture holders are a very clear issue with that shared vision and everyone should be united to ensure we fix those issues with either democratic, accountable structures or removing them somehow.

If you're an apologist or defending them, then thats the issue where people feel like youre not part of the team.
Click to expand...
This is a good post hammertime 👍, full of genuine heartfelt emotion, and makes me wish I was more articulate to get my words out as good as you've done.
So, all I can do is say it the way I see it.

We all wish both sides of the JV were more united to be winning under the one Wests Tigers banner.

But...I hate to say this, the tail of the tiger has been trying to wag the 90% of the body of the tiger, and that very seldom happens.

Imo, HBG debenture holders are NOT the issue with a shared vision.

The HBG debenture holders and others ARE running us with that shared vision, but they want to stay in control of things and run it their way, which I am pretty sure they are entitled to do.

I'm guessing, the 4 board members that were sacked, as well as Richo, were NOT co-operating in a way the owners wanted them to.

So, the reaction from the Balmain side to the 4 board members being sacked with a possibility of 4 Magpies replacing them is 'let's get rid of the debenture holders in any way possible', 'so we can move on to a "democratic accountable structure''...and...how do we do that...we flood WESTS with people from the Balmain side of the JV and take control.

Then, if any people from the Magpies side dare to complain their told "you're not part of the team".

And I hate to say it, that is happening already. I've been called all sorts of rude names, possibly in an attempt to break my will.
But I will not bend, AND NEITHER WILL THE DEBENTURE HOLDERS as far as I can see.

The march on Saturday from Pratten Park to Wests Leagues club to demonstrate, could well be the start of another war

I hope this hasn't sounded aggressive.
If it does all I can do is apologise in advance, as I had no intention of it sounding that way.

None of what I have written is fantasy on my part as it's all been written in earlier posts on here.


 
BZN said:
This is a good post hammertime 👍, full of genuine heartfelt emotion, and makes me wish I was more articulate to get my words out as good as you've done.
So, all I can do is say it the way I see it.

We all wish both sides of the JV were more united to be winning under the one Wests Tigers banner.

But...I hate to say this, the tail of the tiger has been trying to wag the 90% of the body of the tiger, and that very seldom happens.

Imo, HBG debenture holders are NOT the issue with a shared vision.

The HBG debenture holders and others ARE running us with that shared vision, but they want to stay in control of things and run it their way, which I am pretty sure they are entitled to do.

I'm guessing, the 4 board members that were sacked, as well as Richo, were NOT co-operating in a way the owners wanted them to.

So, the reaction from the Balmain side to the 4 board members being sacked with a possibility of 4 Magpies replacing them is 'let's get rid of the debenture holders in any way possible', 'so we can move on to a "democratic accountable structure''...and...how do we do that...we flood WESTS with people from the Balmain side of the JV and take control.

Then, if any people from the Magpies side dare to complain their told "you're not part of the team".

And I hate to say it, that is happening already. I've been called all sorts of rude names, possibly in an attempt to break my will.
But I will not bend, AND NEITHER WILL THE DEBENTURE HOLDERS as far as I can see.

The march on Saturday from Pratten Park to Wests Leagues club to demonstrate, could well be the start of another war

I hope this hasn't sounded aggressive.
If it does all I can do is apologise in advance, as I had no intention of it sounding that way.

None of what I have written is fantasy on my part as it's all been written in earlier posts on here.
Click to expand...
Excellent take as usual
 
Wtiga said:
no i have letter stating it relates to
  • s180
  • s181
  • s182
  • s183
The letter outlines it.
I am not going to paste the argument here for legal reasons.
I cannot share it on a public forum due to possible defamation.
I have seen HBG sue directors over the past 12 months.
My lawyer has said i can share it via email or DM.
That's it.
Click to expand...
Yeah mate...send me a DM.
 
weststigers said:
Yeah mate...send me a DM.
Click to expand...
tbh i don't trust you now.
Others who have asked for it - have not done so with such cynicism.
I don't know if you are aligned with HBG.
So I'm not going to risk it for legal reasons.
I have shared it with many many others who have all read it and thanked me.
Unfortunately I don't get a good vibe from you.
I have seen some HBG apologists on here.
Not saying you are one.
I just go with my gut.
But wish you all the best.
Take care.
 
Wtiga said:
tbh i don't trust you now.
Others who have asked for it - have not done so with such cynicism.
I don't know if you are aligned with HBG.
So I'm not going to risk it for legal reasons.
I have shared it with many many others who have all read it and thanked me.
Unfortunately I don't get a good vibe from you.
I have seen some HBG apologists on here.
Not saying you are one.
I just go with my gut.
But wish you all the best.
Take care.
Click to expand...
I'll survive, but thanks for the free character assessment though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,496 (members: 34, guests: 1,462)
Back
Top