Ankles Bennett

I have a question. If the big 6 and the epl are blocking this takeover because they dont want competition at the top end of the epl from an owner with unlimited financial clout in the form of KSA, what will the EPL do if we find a buyer with Abramovic type financial resources funding our club. Will they try to block that too!!!

Its probably because PIF are (were) going to stump up mega millions to invest in the NE region and the Reubens are (were) going to get all the building contracts. That's the only reason I can see why they are wanting a 10% stake in us!

To me this isnt dead, its more a case of we now have to become an irritating thorn in the side of the EPL. They need to learn that we will not let this go. I know i cant accept this stance taken by the EPL and we just need to keep on asking why they wont let this takeover go through. A classic case of Bird & Bird delaying tactics as we were warned about!!!

Correcting a spelling mistake in a legal document can sometimes alter the intended meaning so entering (sic) after the mistake means this is an unaltered spelling from the original draft!

I drafted a submission on a particular case where the High Court Judge disagreed with me and the case went all the way up to the Court of Appeal who, two years later, set aside the Judges decision and substituted their own decision which mirrored my original submission, so yes judges do sometimes get it wrong!!

Yes I agree that's dreadful, but you see what I mean about one word (or more) in the wrong place changing the intention.

Beloff will be completely impartial as he has a reputation to uphold. He will apply the rules as they are written. These QC's are Wordsmiths, in other words Masters of the English Lanquage. I have spent the last 30 years of my long career dealing with High Court judges and the correct/incorrect interpretation of legislation. If the O&D test has one word in the wrong place it can completely alter its effect, regardless of the policy intention behind the drafting of the O&D tests.

A positive result on any Friday will be a Good Friday!

I don't see why the PL can't allow the takeover with a caveat that any indication of interference by the KSA and NUFC will be expelled from the PL. A simple solution that works surely!!

If arbitration decides the definition of "a director", under section A of the rules, cannot encompass a sovereign state (i.e. the KSA) then the knock on effect on section F will be that the EPL carries out the O&D test solely on the declared directors, and as we all know from last year, there were no red flags in that regard.

The chairman is chosen by the two appointed by the club and the EPL.

I seem to recall seeing a post last year where someone posted a list of PIF sporting assets and it showed NUFC as being a PIF asset. Don't know if it was kosher or not!!

Especially seeing the rumour that Krafth might be sold!!!

But the North East is traditionally a Lsbout stronghold. He may take the point of view that whatever he does that won't change so why bother supporting the takeover!!!

So if PIF is found to be separate from KSA the PL will carry out the O&D on PCP and the Reubens. Any bets taken that one of them will fail the O&D test?

and you are missing the point that by challenging the appointment of Beloff they ensured that he will have to be completely impartial. Any hint of illegally favouring the EPL case will be grounds to have that decision overturned on appeal

if they really want Benitez once (if) the takeover goes through I have no doubt they will buy out his contract at Everton!

Point 6 just means that if the CAT decides it does not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal, or decides it does have jurisdiction but decides not to exercise that jurisdiction, for reasons best known to them, they can give directions as to the disposal of the case, i.e. throw it out, or stay (postpone) the proceedings, because they consider they may have jurisdiction to here the case if we win the arbitration case. Point 7 simply says that if they decide point 6 has no application i.e. they decide they do have jurisdiction and decide to proceed to hear the case, they can issue directions to the parties advising when, and in what order, they will hear the arguments put by both parties to the appeal.

I thought all the declared directors had already passed the O&D test. That's why the EPL came up with idea that KSA would be an undeclared director or shadow director in order to block the takeover !

Probably from the TV revenues. It would mean the prize money for final table positions at the end of 21/22 season will be drastically reduced.

Interesting point but no. The epl clubs have all signed up to follow the epl rules. Our case is the interpretation of those rules. E.G in legislation if it says "MAY", implement certan legislation in reaching a decision the decision maker has "discretion" in making their determination. However if it says "SHALL" then the decision maker has no discretion and must implement the legislation!!!

But if Arbitration finds the EPL implemented their own rules correctly, even if they did take into account evidence put before them by Bein and the "big six" before reaching their determination, there is categorically no grounds to support jurisdiction for a CAT hearing!!!

If Arbitration finds the PL followed their own rules correctly and that ksa could be regarded as an undisclosed director, then there is no issue of a breach of competition law. It follows that regardless of when the CAT case is heard the CAT has no jurisdiction. The sensible course is the CAT judge will adjourn the CAT hearing including any disclosure until after the Arbitration hearing is determined one way or another.

The PL will be arguing that if they win the Arbitration case then the CAT will have no jurisdiction. It's basically saying that deciding the CAT before the Arbitration determination is putting the cart before the horse and I think they have a valid point!

Kanes trying to avoid getting injured so he can get his move to man city