Brumbies chief executive loses new evidence bid, will soon learn of fate

Mr Jones lost his bid on Friday to call new evidence to bolster his argument for temporary whistleblower protection as the high-profile stoush returned to the ACT Supreme Court on the eve of the Super Rugby team's on-field clash against the NSW Waratahs in Sydney.

But in a new twist to the backroom drama, it emerged on Friday night that Canberra's club rugby officials - who hold the balance of power in the Brumbies boardroom - are considering calling off an EGM set for Thursday night.

The club presidents will hold a meeting on Wednesday night where it will likely be decided if proceedings to dissolve the board go ahead or if the EGM transforms into a 'round-table discussion' with the board.

Mr Jones was stood down by the board late last month, and less than 24 hours later launched action claiming he was being punished as a whistleblower, asking for the ACT Supreme Court's temporary protection.

Mr Jones claims to have made disclosures in the public interest about the sale of the Brumbies headquarters in Griffith, and subsequent relocation to the University of Canberra.

The exact nature of those disclosures has been kept secret, but it has been suggested there were irregularities with transactions between 2009 and 2013, and that a KPMG report into the matter made "highly inflammatory" allegations.

Part of the $11.375 million sale of Griffith was supposed to be set aside for Canberra's clubs. When Mr Jones was stood down, club presidents stepped in and called for an EGM.

There remains uncertainty whether the four clubs who called for the EGM continue to support it or whether they will withdraw as they attempt to get answers from the board.

Mr Jones was granted temporary protection and allowed to return to work last month, while the board was gagged and restricted from discussing or taking action on his employment.

But the Brumbies hit straight back, launching action to overturn Mr Jones' temporary protections, arguing, among other things, his disclosures were not serious enough to warrant whistleblower protection.

Justice Richard Refshauge reserved his decision on that on March 29, and had been expected to hand down a decision this week.

The Brumbies hosted their annual State of the Union lunch at the QT Hotel on Friday, and after addressing the function and sitting at the same table as Brumbies chairman Robert Kennedy, Mr Jones walked across the road to the ACT Supreme Court to resume the case.

His new counsel, a silk from Sydney, Terrence Lynch, SC, asked for the matter to be reopened so he could file new evidence in support of the case for whistleblower protection.

To reopen a case in that way, Mr Jones has to show it was in the interests of justice.

The new evidence was said to further show that Mr Jones has been the victim of detrimental action after making public interest disclosures.

"The evidence has the tendency to prove that the detriment occurred because of the protected disclosure," Mr Lynch said.

Mr Lynch said little time had passed between the main hearing and Friday's application to reopen the case, and argued there was nothing to suggest allowing it to be reopened would prejudice the Brumbies or other defendants.

But the Brumbies' lawyer said the board would be put at a serious disadvantage if the new evidence was allowed in. He said it would cause significant delays, maintaining a situation in which the board was severely restricted by court orders.

That left the board unable to explain to members why it stood Mr Jones down, despite facing a possible extraordinary general meeting which would attempt seek its dissolution.

"The board are hamstrung from doing anything about that extraordinary general meeting," he said.

"They are simply left gagged, not only from the press, but also from doing anything about the plaintiff's employment."

It was argued that the evidence was available last month, but Mr Jones' then counsel Wayne Sharwood deliberately decided not to put it before the court.

Steven Whybrow, barrister for the University of Canberra, its vice-chancellor Stephen Parker, UC Union, Joe Roff, David Lamont, and others, argued that there would be months of delay if the new evidence was allowed.

"It would mean the status quo for the applicant would remain into the never never," Mr Whybrow said.

Justice Refshauge refused to reopen the case. He said he would give his reasons on Thursday.

The judge also indicated he would decide on Thursday whether or not to continue the injunction at present protecting Mr Jones.

With Chris Dutton