B-more Mag

#TatBeNewer

If anybody says the arbitration issue is "is PIF separate from KSA" in this new thread, I'm going to fucking explode.

Congratulations, and good luck! I fucking wish one of my goddamned teams would win something, or even come close.

Okay. You all must have a much more expansive right of appeal of arbitration awards than we do, if they're effectively freely appealable and regularly overturned. Neither here nor there, but that undercuts one of the main purposes of arbitration.

Yeah, "final and non-appealable" was my shorthand for arbitration generally being binding. The EPL rules do lay out a list of circumstances in which appeal can be taken Rule X.5), including decisions contrary to English law, and it is expressly subject to the arbitration act. It's still pretty limited (e.g., determinations of fact are generally going to stand).

Re: 2), the arbitration is final and non-appealable, per PL rules. I don't know U.K. law on this, but if it were in the U.S. there would be very limited circumstances in which a court could overturn an arbitration award that's purportedly final and non-appealable, but it takes extraordinary circumstances.

The 28th was when Ashley's company responded to the PL's jurisdiction application. The PL's subsequent reply to that was originally due today, but it has now been extended to the 12 (a seven day extention).

St James Holdings is claimant PL is defendant

PL filed its application on the 11th. St James Holdings filed its response to the PL's application on the 28th. PL has received an extension of time to reply to St James Holdings' response.

Notwithstanding that the PL should probably be closely regulated as a quasi-monopoly, I can't imagine there's any basis for the government to intervene with respect to what appears to be an enforceable arbitration provision.

Extremely normal in here again today, I see.

Dear God this is fucking boring.

Right? I got to up my hourly rate, like.

Updates?! I thought this was the general bitchiness thread.

Not yet (at least not on the CAT website yet).

The article is poorly written (Ryder, no surprise). But presumably the PL offered arbitration over the issue of whether KSA is a director. The PL presumably takes the position that saying KSA is a director is not tantamount to rejecting the takeover -- it just means KSA has to submit a declaration about the officers and directors test factors and otherwise pass the test. (Though we all know that in effect this is pretty much the same as blocking the takeover because it's highly unlikely a sovereign state would subject itself to that.)

England Band really came through for you today.

Holy fuck!

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!

Holes was class.

Ah, the book of Takeover, chapter 5, verse 12. One of my faves.

It's super that we can have this same argument over and over again to pass the time while we W A I T.

The fewer vehicle pursuits the better, really.

The one with the jurisdictional challenge set for hearing in November is a collective proceeding (which I gather is what we'd call a class action over here). I wonder if that may have anything to do with why that one is so far off.

At the risk of being accused of being non-positive, I can't see why there would be any reason for the CAT to delay posting the ruling until Friday, when rulings from other CAT cases are posted same day.