Friday 16 October 2026
Afternoon Edition
ZOTPAPER

News without the noise

ZOTPAPER
Business

NRL wins first round in court battle with NZ Rugby over PNG Chiefs name

Judge rejects urgent injunction, full hearing set for early next year

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
Sources3 outlets
The NRL has won the first legal round in its dispute with New Zealand Rugby over the use of the name 'Chiefs' for its new Papua New Guinea expansion team, with a Wellington judge refusing an urgent injunction that could have forced the club to change its name before its debut season in 2028.

In a hearing on Friday in New Zealand's High Court, Justice Karen Grau rejected New Zealand Rugby's application for an urgent injunction against the NRL's use of the 'Chiefs' name for its PNG-based team. The judge accepted that granting the injunction could harm the expansion team's ability to attract players ahead of its first season in 2028.

New Zealand Rugby had rushed to court ahead of the planned launch of the PNG team's logo and jersey in Port Moresby next week. It argued that the brand value of its long-established Super Rugby franchise, the Chiefs, would be "hugely damaged" by the NRL's use of the same name and by the resulting confusion.

NZ Rugby's barrister, Earl Gray, said the governing body had trademark protections for the Chiefs in New Zealand and accused the NRL of being "negligent" for not checking them. "They've brought this issue on themselves and inexplicably, now want to get away with it," he said. "They didn't search, they didn't check. They've thumbed their noses at New Zealand and its laws."

The dispute will now be heard in full in a New Zealand courtroom early next year, likely determining whether the PNG team can keep its name.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The ruling allows the PNG Chiefs to proceed with their brand launch in Port Moresby, a key milestone for the NRL's expansion into Papua New Guinea, a market rugby league has long targeted for growth.
  • The full hearing early next year will set a precedent for how sports leagues handle name conflicts across different codes and countries, particularly when a new franchise's branding overlaps with an existing team's trademark.
  • For NZ Rugby, the outcome could affect the commercial value of its Chiefs franchise, one of its most recognisable brands, and its ability to protect intellectual property in a crowded sports market.

Background

The NRL announced plans to establish a team in Papua New Guinea, a nation where rugby league is hugely popular, with the franchise backed by the PNG government. The name 'Chiefs' was chosen, but New Zealand Rugby's Super Rugby team, the Chiefs, has been operating under that name for decades. The dispute escalated quickly, with NZ Rugby seeking an injunction before the NRL's official unveiling of the PNG team's branding. The case touches on trademark law and the competitive tensions between rugby league and rugby union in the Pacific region, where both codes vie for players, fans, and commercial opportunities.

Key Perspectives

NRL: Argues the name is not a breach and that an injunction would unfairly damage its expansion plans, potentially affecting player recruitment ahead of the 2028 debut.

NZ Rugby: Maintains it holds valid trademarks in New Zealand and that the use of 'Chiefs' by another major sport creates confusion and devalues its franchise. Its barrister emphasised the NRL's failure to check existing protections.

Judge Karen Grau: Rejected the urgent injunction, balancing the potential harm to the NRL's recruitment against NZ Rugby's longer-term legal claims. The full hearing will allow a more thorough examination of the trademark dispute.

What to Watch

  • The outcome of the full High Court hearing early next year, which will decide the ongoing use of the name.
  • Whether the PNG team proceeds with the planned logo and jersey launch next week as scheduled.
  • Any further legal moves, such as appeals or settlement attempts, and how the dispute affects the NRL's broader expansion strategy into Papua New Guinea.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workSubscribe