Boxing: Auckland body takes scrap back to court

Auckland Boxing is suing New Zealand Boxing for lost earnings and humiliation in a long-running dispute stemming from its suspension over a rogue tournament.

The Auckland Boxing Association has filed a statement of claim in the Auckland District Court seeking almost $40,000 from the New Zealand Boxing Association, and its executive, the New Zealand Boxing Council.

Auckland is claiming $8727 for loss of income during its almost eight-month suspension, and a further $30,000 for distress, humiliation and loss of reputation.

The return to court comes almost six months after the High Court ruled that the NZBC had wrongly suspended the ABA over an unauthorised tournament.

Justice John Priestley said the NZBC's actions breached the rules of natural justice and that it had exceeded its powers in suspending the ABA.

NZBC chairman Keith Walker could not be contacted for comment and a spokeswoman at NZBA said she did not think Walker should talk to the media.

Walker has said he hoped Auckland Boxing would not sue because the sport was not wealthy.

The disputed tournament was a pro-am event held in July last year.

The amateur bouts were to be hosted by the ABA, but when it struggled to get boxers and officials to travel to Dargaville, it withdrew from the tournament. But the bouts went ahead under the umbrella of another organisation which was hosting the professional fights, the New Zealand National Boxing Federation, whose president is Gary McCrystal, a member of the ABA.

Neither the NZBA, ABA nor the police, who issue tournament permits, were notified of the change in host.

When the NZBC found out the tournament had gone ahead without properly authorised officials present, it asked for the resignations of ABA members, including Dargaville promoter Jim Mahoney and the past president, McCrystal.

The ABA reprimanded the men, but did not ask for their resignations, so the NZBC suspended Auckland from the national body.

The ABA argued in the High Court that Mahoney and McCrystal had acted in their private capacities, so the ABA was not liable for their actions.

Justice Priestley said that some of the NZBA's concerns were valid, and the actions of Mahoney and McCrystal were of concern.

But the suspension was invalid and should be set aside, he said.

He also asked for the Auckland and New Zealand bodies to reconcile for the good of the sport.

McCrystal said the ABA "hated" having to seek compensation through the courts.

But the suspension, when Auckland could not host any tournaments but still had to pay overheads such as rents, had been costly.

- NZPA