Iestyn Harris knew exactly what he was doing when he signed a clause agreeing to return to Leeds Rhinos rugby league club, it was claimed as the Bradford Bulls star's High Court contract dispute with his former club drew to a close.

Mr Harris terminated his contract with the Rhinos in the summer of 2001 to fulfil his lifelong ambition of playing for Wales in the Rugby Union World Cup.

But as part of the deal which allowed him to leave Leeds, he agreed to give the Rhinos first refusal on his services should he return to rugby league.

The Oldham-born back, who qualified to play for Wales through his father, duly appeared for Wales in the 2003 World Cup in Australia. But he then decided to quit union and go back to league.

Because of the option, Leeds were confident Harris, 29, would have no choice but to rejoin them - but instead he went to Bradford Bulls, sparking a bitter legal battle.

Yesterday Mr Justice Gray reserved his decision in th dispute, which has seen Leeds sue both their former star player and the Bulls.

Barrister David Griffith-Jones, for Leeds, told the judge that although it was "understandable" Mr Harris's mind was not on the "small print" of the contract, either he or his advisers knew of the return clause many weeks before the deal was concluded on August 9, 2001.

Mr Harris claimed the first he knew of "Clause 5" was on August 8, 2001, when he was told there was a "major hitch" preventing the deal going through.

Mr Griffith-Jones said any hitch had not come from Leeds or chief executive Gary Hetherington.

But Jane Mulcahy, for Mr Harris, said "far from being for Mr Harris's benefit" the clause was all about protecting the interests of Leeds.

Insisting the option did unfairly restrain Mr Harris from seeking other employment and could not be justified, she said it was not in the public interest to allow such clauses to stand.

The court has heard Mr Harris was offered £675,000 for a four-year deal with Leeds in 2004, but turned it down for a contract said to be worth £1million with the Bulls. Leeds are suing for the loss of Mr Harris' services - they say a replacement player would cost as much as £500,000 - plus damages for missing out on increased ticket and shirt revenue.

Mr Justice Gray said he was likely to give judgement in the case next week.