Robert Emmets win case against London expulsion

 

London club Robert Emmets have succeeded in their case against being removed from the county’s hurling championship. A Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA) panel, which featured former GAA director general Páraic Duffy, last night found that the British GAA’s hearing committee and Central Appeals Committee’s decisions to uphold St Gabriel’s appeal against the result of the clubs’ senior hurling semi-final on the basis of Emmets fielding an illegal player should be rescinded.

Emmets won the game on a penalty shootout.

The DRA deemed that Emmets were advised by an earlier decision by a previous hearings committee that they could use the player and therefore did so.

The London final involving Brothers Pearse has been postponed twice as a result of the case, London will also have no representatives in the Connacht club intermediate championship and the board’s competitions control committee are now expected to reschedule the county final.

The DRA statement read: “Following a full DRA Tribunal hearing this (Thursday) evening, the Claimant – Robert Emmetts CLG – have succeeded in their Claim with the Tribunal directing that the decisions of the Provincial Council of Britain Hearings Committee (PCB HC) dated 20 October 2023 and the Central Appeals Committee (CAC) dated 1 November 2023 be quashed.

“The Claimant had challenged the decision of the PCB HC to uphold the appeal of St Gabriels CLG in respect of their objection to the result of the London Senior Hurling Semi Final. They also challenged the subsequent decision of the CAC to uphold the PCB HC decision.

“In finding that the Respondents had erred, the DRA Tribunal (comprised of Mr Michael Murray BL, Mr Gareth Robinson BL, and Mr Páraic Duffy) accepted that the Claimant had received an earlier decision from a differently constituted PCB HC which indicated that a player was eligible to participate in the semi-final and that they were entitled to rely on the decision as communicated.

“The Tribunal noted that irrespective of any frailties in the decision, it had not been appealed and as such remained undisturbed.”