Hakoah in court
The Supreme Court in Sydney will hear an application tomorrow which, if successful, could increase the number of available positions on the Hakoah board from three to eight…ahead of next Tuesday’s planned AGM.
J-Wire has been told that the proposed new board headed by David Balkin, Carl Reid and Andrew Boyarsky is offering Hakoah members a different to plan to the one currently proposed by the incumbent board. They lodged eight nominations for what was understood to be three available positions shortly before the deadline on Tuesday March 3.
The alternate group is planning to put an argument before Justice Brereton tomorrow morning that according to corporation law Hakoah can have seven board members as it currently has rather than the possible 12 …but only if approved by members at an AGM or an EGM…and that it not currently the case. Because of this they believe that the correct number of positions open for the Board should be eight.
The incumbent board headed by president George Farkas now must await for the court’s decision as to the club’s immediate future.
Four members of the current Hakoah board are not up for re-election.
Jews taking other Jews/Jewish organizations to court in commercial matters has never brought blessing.
If necessary there is private legally binding arbitration.
I am speechless at the legal action instituted by Messrs David Balkin, Carl Reid and Andrew Boyarsky – irrespective of the outcome.
Is this the way to unite the Community or irreparably divide it?
David – As a Former JCA President, Chairperson of the Joint Operating Committee- Burger Centre and a Member of JCA Planning Committee – how could you lend your name to this litigation?
I understand your passion and drive. But legal action to try and get eight of your nominees elected to the Board when the Board obviously believed in good faith there were only three vacancies to be filled – not 8 as you apparently claim – is disappointing.
Could you not have just stood three candidates for what everyone believed were three vacancies?
If your nominees were not elected you still had another bite of the cherry with your planned EGM to remove all the directors.
Why court action?
It is a pity that you have chosen not to accept my suggested proposal nor heed Frank Lowy’s letter.
Have you considered what damage may be done beyond splitting the Hakoah membership by this legal action – so far as the organisations seeking to come to White City are concerned?
I would urge you to halt the Court proceedings – contest the three vacant positions
and then proceed with your EGM if that is your wish. I would hope you would see commonsense and let the 7 Hakoah Board Members (whoever they may be) proceed to lodge the DA
Again – I would strongly urge you allow the Club to lodge its DA and only proceed with your plans if that DA is rejected.
Davd Balkin, Andrew Boyarsky and Karl Reid are rebuffing the preference of Frank Lowy to move forward with the plan of the present board.
A very brave move to face down the billionaire, who has been connected with the life of Hakoah from the 60s.
I think the three will fail except if they will announce their personal multi-million dollar charitable commitments to their vision.
Selling prime real estate is never a smart move and is only undertaken when the owner is under immense pressure.