B-more Mag

Written judgments are running about a month plus. Probably looking at seeing something November-ish, unless they speed it up due to public interest. If SJHL wins outright, then the PL will have to file a response to SJHL's claim and there should be an administrative hearing to set a schedule. Looking at next year sometime before anything substantive would happen. (I mean, barring a settlement, of course).

I'll represent you. Been wanting to pull out the old we're Americans and we does what we likes defense.

I'm not watching -- is it anything different that what we've already known: i.e., that PL says KSA's a director and the club/PIF/KSA disagree and haven't provided the info necessary to test KSA?

Baseline is CAT has jurisdiction. It's the PL's burden to establish the CAT doesn't.

What if the pigeon was wearing little Air Max?

This exploitation of pigeons is shameful and really just exacerbates people's pigeon-related prejudices. Not a fan.

It's also not necessarily a binary issue of either being dismissed or moving forward--it could also be stayed pending the arbitration. That could occur if the CAT determines the arbitration is the appropriate venue for certain factual or legal determinations but the CAT also retains jurisdiction with respect to other factual and legal matters (e.g., issues of competition law and monetary damage not at play in the arbitration). This would effectively pause the CAT proceeding until the arbitration is complete, with the CAT case picking up afterward, unless the result of the arbitration makes the CAT case moot.

Chris Mort for me, like.

I can't find the "Who cares?" button.

No one is saying Boo-urns.

Fucking pages and pages of this shit. Again ... and again ... and again.

The company (i.e., NCUK Investment Limited) has an obligation to keep its "people with significant control" information updated and accurate with the Companies House. The filing updates PIF's address as well as making a change from legal form of public investment fund to corporation sole. To the best of my knowledge, "public investment fund" isn't a legal category of entity in the U.K., and my guess is the lawyers thought "corporation sole" more accurately represents what PIF is under U.K. law, so they decided to change that at the same time they did the address change.

As long as PIF is the controlling owner in the proposed structure, it's going to be subject to the officers and directors test. The corporation sole designation wouldn't alter that.

It's an address change for the PIF and a change in the way it's described on a NCUK Investment Limited filing with the Companies House. NCUK Investment Limited can't change the nature of PIF's legal existence by changing a few words on a Companies House form. The PIF is a creature of Saudi Arabian -- the Saudi Arabian law itself would have to be changed in order for the nature of its legal existence to change.

His wife, man ... I can't even imagine.

Ambishun.

Look, if Ashley can give the PIF the deal on a silver platter, no impediments to closing, it seems pretty likely the PIF would do it -- no guarantee, but pretty likely. Right now Ashley can't do that, and, unless and until he can, all the "is PIF still in or is it out" is worth a bucket of warm piss.

Query: Do we let brown sauce participate in the half-time condiment race?

* hot dogs and t-shirts

Can't wait for the anamorphic magpie mascot to shoot pies and scarves into the stands.

"I'm very important and know secret things. Please pay attention to me."

Is the stuff re: Caulkin coming mainly from podcasts? His written piece about Bruce on Monday wasn't particularly flattering to him. E.g., "And so those chants, when they came, had a long, dispiriting backstory. It is a club going nowhere, with no obvious plan besides staying where they are and a manager incapable or unable of offering an alternative."