Kipper won't agree to be traded

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by valo403

Well just because he plays in the NHL doesnt mean this isn't "real life". The only difference here is the terms that govern his contract, which is the point I think you're missing (or someone is missing, I'm a bit lost on who is saying what here). If he was a window washer his "punishment" would likely be payment for damages, if they could be shown.

Also, if it's a resignation to take care of a wife or child with health problems, good luck finding a judge willing to award damages.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by valo403

I call BS. Show me the 'cost' of finding another goaltender, I'll show you a phone call to your farm team.

And what's with all the specific performance talk? There is not a chance in hell that it would ever be contemplated, let alone ordered. It's barely ever available, and when it is it's almost exclusively to do with real property and certainly not the physical performance of an individual.

You are wrong.

Originally Posted by rubecube

Sorry he'd have to pay the Flames the costs of finding a replacement when they're trying to trade him away? I also don't know any team in the NHL that he could be traded to that doesn't already have several goaltenders under contract.

Umm... Contracts can be assigned.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Also, if it's a resignation to take care of a wife or child with health problems, good luck finding a judge willing to award damages.

If the person resigning is not legally allowed to resign, then good luck finding a judge who wouldn't award damages.

This is stupid. I'm done with this conversation.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FAN

You are wrong.

His specific performance is that he's a goaltender. They have other goaltenders. He is technically excess to their needs.

Umm... Contracts can be assigned.

Which proves point the first point.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FAN

You are wrong.


Umm... Contracts can be assigned.

I'm wrong? On what? Show me some precedent of a court compelling a person to perform a task. The fact that you've even suggested it could be applicable here is absolutely laughable.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FAN

If the person resigning is not legally allowed to resign, then good luck finding a judge who wouldn't award damages.

This is stupid. I'm done with this conversation.

Have you ever read the labour code (granted they vary by province) or know anything about compassionate care, etc.?

[RT14]

I posted on the first page that if Kipper is refusing a trade because he just had a baby I would not be impressed and would think poorly of him. If the baby's complications are true I completely take everything back.

Having two young ones of my own, if he had accepted a trade, I can't imagine how any human could focus on their job knowing what was going on back home. Wouldn't be able to deal with it himself and wouldn't be fair to team trading for him.

Completely understandable if true. Wish Kipper and his family the best of luck and good health.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Also, if it's a resignation to take care of a wife or child with health problems, good luck finding a judge willing to award damages.

I don't agree with that, the cause really doesn't matter, if you have no right to avoid the obligations under the contract and your failure to perform causes damages a court is going to award them.

Edit: Just saw your follow up post. I suppose that a labor code or the like could possibly present you with a right to avoid the obligations present in a contract.

[drPepper1]

Well, Kipper's fate is sealed then. He will never become a champion.

So was Olaf Kolzig's fate but he clearly took his family into consideration due to his son being autistic, so he stayed in Washington threw their celler dweller years and was pretty much their back bone. Point being somethings in life are more important then an over sized silver tea cup.

^^^^opinions of canucks fans..i actually agree with the second comment

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm wrong? On what? Show me some precedent of a court compelling a person to perform a task. The fact that you've even suggested it could be applicable here is absolutely laughable.

It's the mikey_the_redneck style of argument. Post something, have it refuted, make counter-arguments but refuse to back them up, tell people they're wrong while still not backing up your own argument, exit argument.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by valo403

I don't agree with that, the cause really doesn't matter, if you have no right to avoid the obligations under the contract and your failure to perform causes damages a court is going to award them.

Edit: Just saw your follow up post. I suppose that a labor code or the like could possibly present you with a right to avoid the obligations present in a contract.

You'd know more than I would, but I've always thought labour code supercedes a contract. Even CBAs have to be compliant with labour codes as far as I know.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You'd know more than I would, but I've always thought labour code supercedes a contract.

Pretty sure it does. You can't break the law, just by putting it in a contract.

[sureLoss]

Spector's Hockey ‏@SpectorsHockey 6m Darren Dreger reports #Flames GM Jay Feaster reached out to Kiprusoff camp 2 weeks ago. There is trade interest in Kipper.


TSN not mentioning anything about Kipper refusing to report.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You'd know more than I would, but I've always thought labour code supercedes a contract. Even CBAs have to be compliant with labour codes as far as I know.

That's what I was saying in my edit, if you have an out under some other code or law I don't see how a contract could be enforced, at least that aspect of it.

[Dion]

Spector's Hockey‏@SpectorsHockey12m
Bob McKenzie noting Kiprusoff could retire after this season. Only 1 year remaining on his contract at actual salary of $1.5 million.

[orr444]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Spector's Hockey ‏@SpectorsHockey 6m Darren Dreger reports #Flames GM Jay Feaster reached out to Kiprusoff camp 2 weeks ago. There is trade interest in Kipper.


TSN not mentioning anything about Kipper refusing to report.

Ya Dreger didn't sound as convinced as Kypreos that kipper wouldn't report. He basically said that if they had a firm offer on kipper, talk to kipper first and they would go from there.

[FlameZilla]

Kipper signs a 3 year contract extension after the draft. Book. It.

[opendoor]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain how retiring breaches his contract. It's clearly spelled out in NHL Bylaws that a player may retire at any time for any reason by notifying his club in writing. By doing so he forfeits any money owed on his contract and agrees to be put on the Voluntary Retired List which means he's ineligible to play in the NHL for 3 years from that date. The Bylaws even specifically spell out a case where a player is traded but retires prior to reporting to his new team and in that case the player is deemed retired and the trade voided.

That aside, even if he did something that was considered a breach of contract (i.e. failure to report without retiring), it's not like this isn't all spelled out in the publicly available CBA and SPC. There are really only 2 options for a team when a player breaches his contract by failing to report. They can either toll his contract and prevent him from playing in the NHL again without fulfilling the terms, or they can terminate his SPC.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by valo403

That's what I was saying in my edit, if you have an out under some other code or law I don't see how a contract could be enforced, at least that aspect of it.

Yeah, I'm not really sure what he was getting at as far as damages. If I have a two year contract to perform a certain task at an hourly wage, and I quit one year into that contract, what are the damages the employer could reasonably seek, especially if I were surplus to the employer's need?

[Ped]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Any GM trading for Kipper would easily be able to find out what his intentions really are before agreeing to a deal...all itb would require is a quick call to his agent with the OK from the Flames management.

No Calgary wouldnt lose a pick because the deal would be voided by the league.

Just curious, why would the NHL void the deal? Was there talk of this when Visnovsky initially refused to report to the Islanders?