Hue puts football future on the line in pursuit of civil act

[Karl]

FROM all indications, the civil action filed by footballer Jermaine Hue against the Jamaica Football Federation (JFF) and former team doctor Carlton Fraser may not be tenable under existing FIFA statutes and the settlement of grievance provisions in the JFF player contract.

However, there appears to be nothing to prevent the player from pursuing his civil action in the Jamaican courts, which would almost certainly incur banishment from the sport indefinitely by FIFA.

Based on statutes addressing the issue, servants or agents of the game are prohibited from seeking settlement in ordinary courts of law “unless specifically provided for in the FIFA regulations”, which clearly make no such provisions for this manner of recourse.

Hue, the Jamaica midfielder and Harbour View FC star, is seeking financial compensation for purported loss of income incurred during his nine-month FIFA-imposed ban arising out of a failed drug test during Jamaica’s 0-2 loss to Honduras in a World Cup qualifier on June 11, 2013.

http://hvfc.net/news/hue-puts-footba.../#.VCLZivldXZg

[Karl]

Aaaah, bwoy?
The all powerful FIFA?

[Karl]

mmm? Does the following imply the JFF is willing to pay up?

“The issue surrounding the player being compensated by the JFF during the time of his suspension is prohibited under FIFA regulations… it was made quite clear that the JFF should not make any payments to Jermaine Hue for the period of his suspension, hence we could not have done so,” JFF General Secretary Raymond Grant told the Jamaica Observer.

http://hvfc.net/news/hue-puts-footba.../#.VCMtvvldX0x

..at least negotiate a settlement?

[Gamma]

this is VERY VERY interesting. new ground for the JFF .... my guess is that the JFF will seek to have it heard before CAS. if there is to be oral orgument then additional costs certainly for hue as CAS sits in Swizerland i beleive

[Sir X]

Really they want a public relations nightmare ? Who failed the yutes!

[Karl]

The law suit?

Did his lawyer or Hue miss anything?
It just appears that the assumption on future earning with the JFF may be hard to prove

Earning lost during the period during the tournament and at his club seem to be on stronger footing...but to claim he would have been selected on future national teams i.e. teams after the tournament where he was found to have used an banned substance

Was there as part of the suit claims for defamation? ...are there risks associated with the act of administering the substance - actual procedure and also physical and physiological injury? ...and as a result also mental adverse effects...perhaps even requiring medical treatment?

Just asking?

btw - I seem to remember one of The Massive posting lawsuit or lawsuits ...could someone please post the actual document filed?

[Gamma]

physical and physiological injuries will have to be proven empirically in this jurisdiction. So to claim it there is no perhaps he should claim it, he would have had to see a professional and have them make that diagnosis. it is hard to prove and the damages are nothing like they are in america.

defamation has a specific meaning...who defamed who? bearing in mind that TRUTH is a defence.

the claim for future representation is something that couldbe easy to prove or hard to prove. easy in asking the coach were you likely to call him again? if yes there you have it (factors like minjury and loss of form may be considered but the standard of proof here is "more likely than not".

also future earnings ... did he have a pendng contract or trial? what is the likelhood of him being offered a contract after that etc.

last but not least this is NOT a jury trial and so if spurious claims are made, it could prejudice the lawyer and the client before the tribunal..

[Gamma]

its more than that. if they accede to hearing it in the JA courts FIFA affiliation could be jeapordised

[Karl]

physical and physiological injuries will have to be proven empirically in this jurisdiction. So to claim it there is no perhaps he should claim it, he would have had to see a professional and have them make that diagnosis. it is hard to prove and the damages are nothing like they are in america.

defamation has a specific meaning...who defamed who? bearing in mind that TRUTH is a defence.

the claim for future representation is something that couldbe easy to prove or hard to prove. easy in asking the coach were you likely to call him again? if yes there you have it (factors like minjury and loss of form may be considered but the standard of proof here is "more likely than not".

also future earnings ... did he have a pendng contract or trial? what is the likelhood of him being offered a contract after that etc.

last but not least this is NOT a jury trial and so if spurious claims are made, it could prejudice the lawyer and the client before the tribunal..

Thanks.
...and as always I defer to the expert. Hey...that is why I called for answers to my mussing!

Again - Thank you.

Last question for now - Would Hue's receipt of that illegal/banned substance bring into question the JFF's obligation to protect him from such? Is a claim for negligence and reckless disregard for Hue's health and safety bound up in the suit? ...or considered likely to be argued by his legal team?

[Gamma]

how does the issue of "safety" come up?

[Rockman]

Gamma,flick een a call when you can,please.

[Gamma]

will do

[Karl]

how does the issue of "safety" come up?

Based on our conversations over the years you know I am a layman where 'things legal'=courts/attorney/lawsuits...etc. are concerned:

In my sentence the word safety as used: = protected physical well-being! That is, the thought process is the JFF must have a legal responsibility to ensure the players under its care enjoy as far as possible - (i.e. Enjoy more than mere reasonable protection from negligence to each player's 'safety'=physical well being...right?)? ...so if the JFF was negligent in any manner...employed a less than competent medical doctor, a medical doctor in its employ acted in a negligent manner or through lack of qualified experience or training performed poorly or performed less than to best ability or accepted norms - (I guess we can assume it would be next to impossible to believe or in any case sue that the medical doctor acted in a malicious manner?) - ...etc., etc...then would not the JFF be liable for compensating Hue if it or its employee-the medical Doctor so acted?