Court bid launched to blow up Wests Tigers power base
Chris Barrett
October 17, 2026 — 5:00am
Explosive new legal action against the owner of Wests Tigers is attempting to dismantle its power base and hand rank-and-file members effective control of the joint-venture team.
The case has been launched by ousted director Tony Andreacchio and his wife Denise against Western Suburbs Leagues Club, otherwise known as Holman Barnes Group, and threatens to bring two years of conflict behind the scenes into court.
The $100 million licensed club operation is the 90 per cent shareholder of the Tigers and has the majority on the team’s board, giving it ultimate say in the destiny of the perennial NRL also-rans.
The NSW Supreme Court proceedings are seeking to overthrow HBG’s decades-old governance model, which hands the reins of the poker machine empire – and by extension, the Tigers – to an exclusive group of 20 so-called debenture holders.
The structure, established in the 1950s, reserves five of the organisation’s seven board seats for debentures, while the other two are elected by members.
The action brought by the Andreacchios describes the system as “oppressive” and “unfairly discriminatory” against members.
They are bidding to have the debenture-holding directors’ positions declared vacant by the court and for a new election to be called, at which club members would vote for all seven spots on the board.
HBG chairman Dennis Burgess is named as a defendant along with the club itself, as are the 19 other debentures individually. They include two Tigers board members – former Wests Magpies fullback Leo Epifania and Michael Liubinskas.
The matter is set to be heard in court on October 26.
HBG declined to comment.
Tony Andreacchio, a former Tigers director, was one of three HBG directors banned for a combined 15 years in 2024.
This masthead reported at the time that he was cast out for six years for behaviour which allegedly included yelling at a fellow HBG director and calling him a “f---ing suck” and saying to a board member after the Tigers 2024 season launch words to the effect of: “You f---ing softie”.
According to documents filed with the court, Andreacchio is asking the court to declare a finding of unreasonable conduct against him as “void and of no effect” and that his expulsion was “designed to entrench the debenture holders’ control of the board”.
He is pursuing damages, reinstatement as a financial member of the club and for his sacking as a director and the stripping of his membership to be rendered invalid.
His wife is a party to the claim because she remains a club member.
Fellow HBG directors Rick Wayde and David Gilbert, the former Test cricketer, were suspended at the same time as Andreacchio, and there was more upheaval when chair Julie Romero was deposed last year. Wayde took legal action to challenge his eight-year ban before settling with the club last December.
Andreacchio, Wayde and Gilbert had instigated a review of the Tigers’ operations, which led to an independent board being put in place at the football club in January 2025.
HBG reassumed power less than a year later in a takeover that led football club chief executive Shane Richardson to resign.
The Tigers’ independent chairman Barry O’Farrell was also briefly dismissed before being reinstated at the behest of Australian Rugby League Commission chair Peter V’landys.
One of HBG’s first moves after reassuming control of the Tigers board was to extend the contract of coach Benji Marshall by three years until the end of the 2030 season.
Its debenture system is the subject of an ongoing Liquor and Gaming NSW investigation following a series of complaints.
Questions have also been asked whether HBG’s shift into soccer in the past 15 months runs counter to its obligation to support rugby league.
The club bought a stake in APIA Leichhardt FC and took charge of the Central Coast Mariners women’s team in the A-Leagues while long-time soccer official Frank Primerano has become the most influential figure at HBG, becoming deputy chairman last year and joining the Tigers board in December. Former APIA Leichhardt president Tony Raciti was also made a debenture holder.
The club’s constitution compels it to “assist generally in the promotion, conduct and propagation of rugby league football” in western Sydney and elsewhere.
SMH
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers since 2018!
Could the Tigers be up for sale soon… it seems that HBG are staking the board room and giving debentures to soccer types . One hopes that this court action has some merit as the best interest of the Weststigers are certainly not a priority of the HBG … maybe time for a REAL protest against this organisation one that PVL can not ignore !
Could the Tigers be up for sale soon… it seems that HBG are staking the board room and giving debentures to soccer types . One hopes that this court action has some merit as the best interest of the Weststigers are certainly not a priority of the HBG … maybe time for a REAL protest against this organisation one that PVL can not ignore !
Change is coming, I can feel it.
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers since 2018!
Court bid launched to blow up Wests Tigers power base
Chris Barrett
October 17, 2026 — 5:00amExplosive new legal action against the owner of Wests Tigers is attempting to dismantle its power base and hand rank-and-file members effective control of the joint-venture team.
The case has been launched by ousted director Tony Andreacchio and his wife Denise against Western Suburbs Leagues Club, otherwise known as Holman Barnes Group, and threatens to bring two years of conflict behind the scenes into court.
The $100 million licensed club operation is the 90 per cent shareholder of the Tigers and has the majority on the team’s board, giving it ultimate say in the destiny of the perennial NRL also-rans.
The NSW Supreme Court proceedings are seeking to overthrow HBG’s decades-old governance model, which hands the reins of the poker machine empire – and by extension, the Tigers – to an exclusive group of 20 so-called debenture holders.
The structure, established in the 1950s, reserves five of the organisation’s seven board seats for debentures, while the other two are elected by members.
The action brought by the Andreacchios describes the system as “oppressive” and “unfairly discriminatory” against members.
They are bidding to have the debenture-holding directors’ positions declared vacant by the court and for a new election to be called, at which club members would vote for all seven spots on the board.
HBG chairman Dennis Burgess is named as a defendant along with the club itself, as are the 19 other debentures individually. They include two Tigers board members – former Wests Magpies fullback Leo Epifania and Michael Liubinskas.
The matter is set to be heard in court on October 26.
HBG declined to comment.
Tony Andreacchio, a former Tigers director, was one of three HBG directors banned for a combined 15 years in 2024.
This masthead reported at the time that he was cast out for six years for behaviour which allegedly included yelling at a fellow HBG director and calling him a “f---ing suck” and saying to a board member after the Tigers 2024 season launch words to the effect of: “You f---ing softie”.
According to documents filed with the court, Andreacchio is asking the court to declare a finding of unreasonable conduct against him as “void and of no effect” and that his expulsion was “designed to entrench the debenture holders’ control of the board”.
He is pursuing damages, reinstatement as a financial member of the club and for his sacking as a director and the stripping of his membership to be rendered invalid.
His wife is a party to the claim because she remains a club member.
Fellow HBG directors Rick Wayde and David Gilbert, the former Test cricketer, were suspended at the same time as Andreacchio, and there was more upheaval when chair Julie Romero was deposed last year. Wayde took legal action to challenge his eight-year ban before settling with the club last December.
Andreacchio, Wayde and Gilbert had instigated a review of the Tigers’ operations, which led to an independent board being put in place at the football club in January 2025.
HBG reassumed power less than a year later in a takeover that led football club chief executive Shane Richardson to resign.
The Tigers’ independent chairman Barry O’Farrell was also briefly dismissed before being reinstated at the behest of Australian Rugby League Commission chair Peter V’landys.
One of HBG’s first moves after reassuming control of the Tigers board was to extend the contract of coach Benji Marshall by three years until the end of the 2030 season.
Its debenture system is the subject of an ongoing Liquor and Gaming NSW investigation following a series of complaints.
Questions have also been asked whether HBG’s shift into soccer in the past 15 months runs counter to its obligation to support rugby league.
The club bought a stake in APIA Leichhardt FC and took charge of the Central Coast Mariners women’s team in the A-Leagues while long-time soccer official Frank Primerano has become the most influential figure at HBG, becoming deputy chairman last year and joining the Tigers board in December. Former APIA Leichhardt president Tony Raciti was also made a debenture holder.
The club’s constitution compels it to “assist generally in the promotion, conduct and propagation of rugby league football” in western Sydney and elsewhere.
SMH
I've got a more detailed summary to share in response to this new claim but to set out the key next steps in brief
- On October 26, the parties will attend the court for directions hearing at which point the judge makes orders for the exchange of evidence. What does that mean? If Tony believes that there is legal basis for the Court to find that the debenture system is oppressive then he needs to provide evidence of this.
- It's also likely that on October 26 the Court may order the parties to mediation (as an alternative to full blown Court). Mediation may help if Tony was only seeking reinstatement. The fact that he is seeking an order that the debenture system be disbanded makes it a little bit harder for mediation to achieve an outcome like Rick Wayde's claim. There is no way Burgess and co will give up their status. Turkeys don't vote for Xmas.
- the only caveat to the above is the fact that ALL DEBENTURE HOLDERS are defendants. If on 26 October, one lawyer attends Court and is acting for all debenture holders then that implies there is unity among those individuals. If there are multiple lawyers acting for different debenture holders then that is potentially a POSITIVE sign because it would indicate that they are some holes in the Holman Barnes ship. If there are multiple lawyers acting for multiple debenture holders then the cost to the Wests Legues Club will be enormous.
1. What is Andreacchio alleging?
Tony Andreacchio says the Holman Barnes Group (HBG) debenture structure is oppressive and unfairly discriminatory against ordinary members, and that his expulsion was designed to protect it.
Parties: Tony and Denise Andreacchio v Western Suburbs Leagues Club Ltd (HBG), chairman Dennis Burgess, and the 19 other debenture holders individually, including Tigers directors Leo Epifania and Michael Liubinskas.
The target: a 1950s model under which 20 debenture holders fill 5 of 7 board seats. Members elect only 2.
Structural relief: the debenture directors' seats declared vacant, with members voting on all 7 seats at a fresh election.
Personal relief: the finding of unreasonable conduct against him declared void; his removal as director and his expulsion set aside; reinstatement as a financial member; damages.
Next step: listed on 26 October 2026, almost certainly for directions rather than a full hearing.
2. Why is his wife a party?
Denise Andreacchio is a safeguard. She protects the structural claim if Tony's personal claim fails.
The risk to Tony's claim. Tony was expelled, so his ability to bring the structural claim rests on his membership being restored first. The court could find he has no legal basis for reinstatement, for example because the expulsion followed the club's constitution and was fairly decided. If that happens, he is no longer a member, and his challenge to the HBG board structure falls over with it.
How does Denise close that gap? Denise is still a financial member of the club. Her standing doesn't depend on anything that happened to Tony. With her as a co-plaintiff, the structural claim stands on its own, brought by a sitting member. Even if Tony loses on reinstatement, the court still has to decide whether the debenture structure is oppressive or unfairly discriminatory to members.
The practical effect of this is significant. HBG can't end the structural challenge by defeating Tony's personal claim, or by settling with him alone. Denise would have to be dealt with too.
3. What happened in the Wayde claim, and why is this one different?
Rick Wayde brought a similar NSW Supreme Court claim after HBG removed him in near- identical circumstances, and settled it in December 2025. Andreacchio's claim is different because it attacks who controls HBG, not just his own removal.
How both men were removed. In 2024 HBG removed three of its directors: Andreacchio (on the board 6 years), Wayde (8 years) and David Gilbert (6 months). They were banned for a combined 15 years, stripped of their standing as members and excluded from all HBG venues, including Wests Ashfield, Croydon Sports and the Markets Club. All three had driven the review of Tigers operations that led to an independent Tigers board in January 2025.
What Wayde did. Wayde challenged his ban and the removal of his membership in the NSW Supreme Court: Wayde v Western Suburbs Leagues Club Ltd [2025] NSWSC 511. His case was about him: whether HBG had validly and fairly removed him.
How it ended. The proceedings settled in December 2025, before any final judgment. The terms have not been made public. Matters like this usually settle with the ban lifted, membership restored, each side paying its own costs and a confidentiality clause, but that is inference, not reported fact. A press reference to HBG reinstating directors is too vague to rely on, and it is unclear whether Wayde went back to the board or only to membership.
Why that matters for Andreacchio. Because Wayde settled, the court never decided whether HBG acted unfairly. Andreacchio has no findings from that case to rely on and must prove his own case from scratch.
The difference here. Naming all 20 debenture holders and tying the expulsion to the structural claim makes a quiet buy-off much harder.
4. Can this claim follow the Wayde path?
Only half of it. The personal claim can settle the way Wayde's did; the structural claim cannot.
Why the personal claim can. HBG can reinstate his membership, withdraw the unreasonable-conduct finding and agree costs, exactly as it likely did for Wayde.
Why the structural claim cannot.
Settling it means the debenture holders giving up seats. Each of the 20 is a named defendant and would have to agree.
Changing the board structure likely needs a constitutional amendment, not just a deed between the parties.
Reinstatement alone doesn't solve his problem. The article doesn't say he gets a debenture back, so he would return as an ordinary, openly hostile member with no route to the board.
He has pleaded the expulsion as part of the entrenchment story, so accepting a personal deal undercuts his own case.
The result is that a clean mediated outcome is hard to see. Any deal would have to be either a split (personal settled, structural dropped) or a negotiated reform of the board.
5. Where could this be in 12 months?
The court process is the only live pressure on HBG; the NRL and the regulator are unlikely to move first. That shapes all three scenarios.
The backdrop.
NRL: the 2024 ten-year licences give no near-term renewal leverage. The licence sits with the Wests Tigers, not HBG, and no club has lost a licence for governance alone; the Titans and Knights were financial collapses. The NRL would act only if the Tigers were destabilised again.
Liquor and Gaming NSW: has investigated the debenture model for about five years without acting. It is more likely to follow court findings than lead. L&G most likely wait to see what happens just as the NRL will.
Politics: the state election is on 13 March 2027. Wests Ashfield sits in Summer Hill, a safe Labor seat (21.6% margin in 2023), so there is little electoral pressure. Registered Clubs are a big lobby group and if L&G throw out a board (however hopeless) this would get Registered Clubs NSW offside.
Scenario A: the slow grind (most likely). Directions on 26 October set a timetable. HBG fights standing and tries to strike out the structural claim. Evidence and interlocutory steps fill the year, with no final hearing by October 2027. HBG's control is intact and everyone else waits.
Scenario B: the split. HBG settles the personal claim by reinstating Andreacchio's membership, and the structural claim is dropped or struck out. HBG's best outcome. Andreacchio becomes a vocal member without a board seat, and the structural question goes back to the regulator.
Scenario C: negotiated reform. A court-ordered mediation, plus costs exposure for 20 individual defendants and the regulator in the background, produces a constitutional change such as fewer reserved seats and a member-elected majority. Andreacchio claims victory and drops damages. The least likely of the three, but the only one that changes control.
Wildcards. Another Tigers board purge, soccer spending or damage to the Balmain identity could bring the NRL in. Any adverse court finding would give Liquor and Gaming the evidence it has lacked.
@mickb Thanks for that info - a lot of work and it seems you have a legal background. Just a couple of questions please. Would you say:
1. Tony has a strong legal argument and therefore some chance of success of the court ruling for a change in the status quo
2. a weak legal argument with his position intended primarily to publicly embarrass Burgess and the other debenture holders.
Cheers
@mickb Thanks for that info - a lot of work and it seems you have a legal background. Just a couple of questions please. Would you say:
1. Tony has a strong legal argument and therefore some chance of success of the court ruling for a change in the status quo
2. a weak legal argument with his position intended primarily to publicly embarrass Burgess and the other debenture holders.
Cheers
Everyone looks like a lawyer now with ChatGPT
@tiger5150 agree totally. Ai has lawyers squarely in its sights. I was a lawyer for 7 years but the long hours got too much for me.
@mickb Thanks for that info - a lot of work and it seems you have a legal background. Just a couple of questions please. Would you say:
1. Tony has a strong legal argument and therefore some chance of success of the court ruling for a change in the status quo
2. a weak legal argument with his position intended primarily to publicly embarrass Burgess and the other debenture holders.
Cheers
Good questions. The strength of the legal argument depends on the quality of the evidence that is put in front of the judge and the judges view of that evidence.
In my years of working on the tools as a lawyer, very few disputes get to final hearing because it gets very expensive. This is no different.
Its 2 parts this Tony A claim. To talk through it in basic terms:
1. He wants his membership reinstated so he can re-enter the club and enter the meat raffle on a Friday night etc
2. He is going ALL IN with his attempt at taking down the debenture structure. This becomes very very complex legally. Its very also potentially hard to resolve that part of the claim by settlement and quickly.
Given the above 1 of 2 things happen in my view.
a) If the debenture holders are tight and they want to fight together to preserve the system then this will drag out in 2027 with articles in the paper every few months (destabilising the playing group and ensuring another season is written off)
b) if there is division among the debenture holders and they are not unified then it immediately strengthens Tony A's position in my view.
It would be interesting to know who is going to pay the legal costs of the defendants. I predict that HBG would likely cover the legal costs of the club directors https://holmanbarnesgroup.com.au/board-of-directors/
but I am not sure if the other debenture holders would be covered. If some of the debenture holders are defending legal claims for 1-2 years with lawyers involved that could come at significant personal expense. Those not covered by HBG would be happy to walk away from their debenture holder status if it saved them from a six figure legal bill.
In the background to this HBG likely holds its AGM next March (at least it has in previous years) where I think 2 new board members would be elected (to fill the spots vacated by Tony A and Rick Wayde's removal). Tony A may look to have the Court order those elections not go ahead pending resolution of his dispute.
Tony A has grand intentions - he could have gone down the Wayde path and just got his membership back but he is trying to achieve something more significant that has the potential to clear away this outdated governance model once and for all. The price we might have to pay for that is 12-24 months of negative headlines while this drama plays out before the Courts.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/5v4ucGetC5ruREulTGWKdh?si=6e76c81ff71545db
Lee H asked about debenture system on SEN this morning. Didn't hold back.
Jimmy Smith (who is tight with HBG director Shannon Cavanagh) asked Lee a question about a potential constitution change that would allow members to have more of a say. Noting at the moment there are 7 board appointments and only 2 are member elected.
It smells like HBG might offer Tony A a settlement under which a third member elected position which would lead to the board, so we'd end up with:
4 debenture holders
3 member elected
but Tony A would be crazy to accept that. The debenture holders would still hold a majority and the member elected members would be wasting their time and effort.
Unfortunately, if Liquor and Gaming don’t have an issue with it and the system meets governance requirements under the registered clubs act, then I can’t see the action being successful.
I would also assume that WA have deeper pockets and could afford a longer battle than those who started the action.
Its a shame, our Wests Tigers are just stuck in the middle.
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers since 2018!
The Australian and Telegraph are reporting that HBG CEO Daniel Paton has been stood down pending an investigation. Its behind a paywall - be great if someone could post it.
The Australian and Telegraph are reporting that HBG CEO Daniel Paton has been stood down pending an investigation. Its behind a paywall - be great if someone could post it.
Wests Tigers plunged into fresh turmoil after director Daniel Paton stood down amid complaint
Wests Tigers have descended into chaos once again with board member and Holman Barnes chief executive Daniel Paton stood aside pending an investigation.
While it is unclear the exact reasons why Paton has stood aside from both his roles, it is understood it relates to some sort of complaint. Attempts to contact Paton on Thursday night were unsuccessful.
Paton was blindsided at an emergency board meeting on Wednesday where he was told he would be stood down pending an investigation. Staff were informed on Thursday that he was on leave.
“Holman Barnes Group advises that chief executive officer Daniel Paton is currently on a period of leave,” a statement read.
“The board has appointed Michelle Nielsen, the group’s chief commercial officer, as interim chief executive officer.”
Nielsen is also on the Tigers board.
It is the latest in a long list of calamities for the Tigers at board level.
Last year, Holman Barnes sacked four independent directors including current chairman Barry O’Farrell, who was one of two removed board members to return to their posting. This follows the high-profile removal of Lee Hagipantelis as a board member two years earlier.
Paton was parachuted onto the board at the end of 2025.
He has been at the helm of Holman Barnes since August last year having spent almost a decade as their chief financial officer.
Paton is also on the board of the Central Coast Mariners.
Holman Barnes has been caught up in its own political infighting with multiple members taking legal action against the club.
Denise Andreacchio – the wife of banished former chairman Tony – launched legal action in the Supreme Court last month, seeking to blow up the debenture system and hand control back to members of the Holman Barnes Group.
Tony also launched legal action in a separate claim to have his membership reinstated after being banned for six years.
Tony, David Gilbert and Rick Wayde were sensationally banned from serving on the Holman Barnes Group board on New Year’s Eve, 2024. Tony was expelled for six years.
Months later, former Holman Barnes chair Julie Romero was suspended for eight years.
Wayde settled out of court after taking his own legal action.
The latest drama is an unwelcomed distraction for Wests Tigers chief executive Shaun Mielekamp who has done well to help build the club without the interference of the Holman Barnes Group.
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers since 2018!
All to do with HBG and nothing to do with WT despite the headline