World Series Cricket - Court Case

Court Case

A largely unknown Kerry Packer arrived in London in late May 1977. He appeared on David Frost's The Frost Programme to debate his concept with commentators Jim Laker and Robin Marlar. Marlar's aggressive, indignant interrogation of Packer came unstuck when Packer proved to be articulate, witty and confident that his vision was the way of the future. The show significantly raised Packer's profile and converted some to his way of thinking. The main goal of his trip was to meet the game's authorities and reach some type of compromise. He made a canny move by securing Richie Benaud as a consultant. Benaud's standing in the game and his journalistic background helped steer Packer through the politics of the game.

Cricket's world governing body, the International Cricket Conference (ICC), now entered a controversy initially perceived as an Australian domestic problem. They met with Packer, Benaud and two assistants at Lord's on 23 June to discuss the WSC plans. After ninety minutes of compromise from both sides had almost created common ground, Packer demanded that the ICC award him the exclusive Australian television rights after the 1978–79 season ended. It wasn't in the power of the ICC to do so and Packer stormed from the meeting to deliver the following unadulterated declaration of war:

Had I got those TV rights I was prepared to withdraw from the scene and leave the running of cricket to the board. I will take no steps now to help anyone. It's every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost.

This outburst undid any goodwill that Packer had created during his earlier television appearance, and alarmed his contracted players, who had viewed his scheme as being as much philanthropic as commercial. The ICC decided to treat Packer's scheme with contempt when a month later they decided Packer's matches would not be given first-class status and the players involved would be banned from Test match and first class cricket.

A number of the signed players now considered withdrawing. Jeff Thomson and Alvin Kallicharan had their contracts torn up when it was discovered that they had binding agreements with a radio station requiring them to play for Queensland. Packer moved quickly to shore up support, meeting with the players and taking legal action to prevent third parties from inducing players to break their contracts. To clarify the legal implications (including the proposed bans), Packer backed a challenge to the TCCB in the High Court by three of his players: Tony Greig, Mike Procter and John Snow.

The case began on 26 September 1977 and lasted seven weeks. The cricket authority's counsel said that if the top players deserted traditional cricket then gate receipts would decline. Mr. Packer's lawyers stated that the ICC had tried to force the Packer players to break their contracts and to prevent others from joining them. Justice Sir Christopher Slade considered the following nine points:

1. Are the contracts between WSC and its players void?
2. Has WSC established that, as at 3 August, and subject to any statutory immunity conferred by the 1974 Act, it was a good cause of action in tort against the ICC based on inducement of breach of contract?
3. Has WSC established that as at 3 August and subject as aforesaid, it had a good cause of action in tort against the TCCB based on the same grounds?
4. Subject to the provisions of the 1974 Act, are the new ICC rules void as being in restraint of trade?
5. Subject to aforesaid, are the proposed new TCCB rules void as being in restraint of trade?
6. Is the ICC an employers' association within the 1974 Act?
7. Is the TCCB an employers' association?
8. If either the ICC or TCCB or both be employers' associations, does this itself bar any cause of action that would otherwise exist?
9. In the light of the answers, what relief (if any) should be given to (a) the individual plaintiffs and (b) WSC?

Justice Slade in his judgment said that professional cricketers need to make a living and the ICC should not stand in their way just because its own interests might be damaged. He said the ICC might have stretched the concept of loyalty too far. Players could not be criticized for entering the contracts in secrecy as the main authorities would deny the players the opportunity to enjoy the advantages offered by WSC.

The decision was a blow to the cricket authorities and, adding insult to injury, they had to pay court costs. English County cricket teams were pleased as their players who had signed to play for Packer were still eligible to play for them.