B-more Mag

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.

It looks like the CAT doesn't post the parties' written filings (at least I haven't seen any in any of the cases that I've pulled up where it has entered a ruling based, at least in part, on what would have been written submissions), but as @Jackie Broon points out, as far as hearings go, the CAT is very transparent (you can watch hearings and hearing transcripts are posted). The CAT's decision on the PL's challenge of the CAT's jurisdiction will be filed at some point, and that should give us a fairly good idea of what the PL submitted and what, if anything, Ashley's company submitted or submits. I'm a bit skeptical of the rumors that the CAT has already decided, as the CAT's guidance on the CAT rules says: "Any application to dispute the jurisdiction will usually be set down for oral hearing by a Chairman sitting alone." But "usually" doesn't mean "always", so maybe/hopefully this is an exception.

Which one's Gorka?

The arbitration is actually about whether the PL appropriately decided KSA would be a director under the definitions in the PL rules.

While it would be great if the PL loses the jurisdictional challenge, it wouldn't really say anything about the strength of either side's substantive case in the CAT proceeding.

Would be insane to restart it.

My wife went into v-tach rhythm back in March and had to have compressions and such. Luckily it happened when she was already in the hospital. Had bypass surgery and is now doing great. Can only hope the quick medical response results in something like that or better for him.

Fuck, man. Just heard about this. Hope he pulls through.

The silly hat and shirt clearly a reference to traditional Saudi attire, the culturally insensitive fuck.

My guess is that it's a bit of both. One prong of the relief Ashley's holding company is asking for in the CAT case is an order that the PL must reverse its decision about KSA being a director. That's pretty much what the club is after in the arbitration, through a different channel and probably somewhat different legal theories. But it's also additional pressure on the PL--and pressure is always what you're looking for in any kind of litigation, etc., as it's what brings things to a head.

That's basically right. The submission is to the CAT itself, and it could do the two things you mentioned, or possibly a sort of in-between option of saying "there may be something here for us, but we've got to wait until after the arbitration decides certain things before it gets to our part, so this is on hold until then".

Yes, effectively. Technically, it would be an argument that the CAT doesn't have the power/authority (jurisdiction) to handle the case before it, so the case must be dismissed or possibly paused (stayed). Presumably the argument centers on the probability that the arbitration will decide some or all of the issues that would be before the CAT.

Good. Looks like they probably did then. (Though that's really awkward language, since PIF doesn't get declared -- it's making declarations of fact to the PL).

Looks like one of those things we don't know for sure.

That's ambiguous, though, and leaves open the possibility it was done through informal correspondence. I'm wondering if they actually submitted the formal declaration. Hopefully they weren't stupid enough not to.

Do we know for sure that the PIF submitted its signed director declaration? I honestly can't remember.

*rimshot*