The claim states the incident prompted the “loss of NRL career” and “loss of future incoming earning capacity”. While there is no mention of the recompense sought in the documents filed to the court, sources not authorised to speak publicly due to the matter being before the courts said the figure would be about $5 million.
The claim states Manly was negligent in its “Failure to provide a safe place of work”, citing a number of issues including “Depriving the plaintiff of water and other fluids during the training session”, not taking into account that players were returning to training after an end-of-season break and not considering each players’ physical preparedness to withstand the demands of the session. Those failings, the claim states, resulted in “Placing the plaintiff in a position of peril.”
Following the incident, Perrett was taken to Mona Vale Hospital by ambulance for emergency treatment and remained there until discharged three days later. The claim states Perrett recuperated at home for seven weeks “in a state of severe pain and nausea with a lack of capacity to thermoregulate and unable to engage in any physical activity.” He started walking six weeks after the incident and resumed team training in the third week of December 2017, where he participated in a portion of the session before he became “dizzy” and suffered from “blurred vision”, resulting in club treatment and a return to hospital.
“As a result of the injuries and continuing disabilities, the plaintiff has sustained consequential losses in that he was unable to regain his pre-accident form as a first-grade rugby league player and was prevented from progressing his playing career in the NRL Competition or otherwise,” the claim states.
“The plaintiff played in 10 or 11 games under the NRL Playing Contract in 2018 at far below the level of performance he would have enjoyed but for the Accident because he could not thermoregulate, he was in constant pain, he was prevented from taking the medication indicated by reason of the NRL Anti-Doping Rules by which the parties were bound and he spent a lot of time in each game off the field.”
Before the incident, Perrett was considered a player of great promise. The claim states he received a rugby league scholarship from the age of 13 or 14 at the Sydney Roosters after being spotted by the club’s then recruiter Peter O’Sullivan; was a former Junior Kangaroos co-captain and NSW Cup player of the year; represented Queensland at junior level and was later picked in an emerging Maroons senior squad, and was a regular NRL player.
Perrett managed to briefly play in the NRL after the incident but claims he was never the same person or player. He finished his career with 56 NRL matches for the Bulldogs and Sea Eagles.
According to the claim, club-directed measures such as using ice baths and ice vests were “unsuccessful” in treating the prop-forward’s health issues in his attempts to return.
“The plaintiff was subsequently directed by the Club to play in part of the last 5 or 6 games towards the end of the 2019 season as many of the Club’s other players could not play due to their injuries,” the claim states.
None of the staffers who oversaw the session in question remain at the Sea Eagles. Manly declined to comment.
In an interview with this masthead in May last year, Perrett spoke about the physical and mental toll the incident had on him.
“I was comatose,” Perrett said at the time. “Six out of 10 people die in this situation, that’s what the nurse told me when I was in hospital.
Related Article
Lloyd Perrett playing for the Sea Eagles in 2019.
NRL 2024
‘We can’t be killing our young footy stars’: Why Perrett intends to sue Sea Eagles
“I became much more anxious [afterwards], I was even suicidal at points.
“If it wasn’t for my parents, I would have taken my own life … I considered myself to be worthless.”
Perrett said for years he had grappled with whether to proceed with legal action, but felt he had no choice.
“I feel I need to do this,” Perrett said at the time. “It’s not about money, it’s not about me. I put my ego aside because I know people are going to tease me, they already are. They’re saying I’m just a wash-up, I’m not good enough, that I’m trying to get money and all that. But it’s about player safety.”
Perrett’s is the second legal action taken by a player against their club that is before the Supreme Court. Former Canterbury forward Jackson Topine is su-ing Canterbury, claiming he was subjected to “assault” when forced to wrestle up to 35 teammates during a training session last year. The Bulldogs have publicly stated they will defend the matter.
