Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

Takeover Thread - July 1st statement, Staveley letter to Tracey Crouch (and response) in OP

Yorkie

by Yorkie
in Football

 Share

Will the takeover be complete by this summer?  

312 members have voted

  1. 1. Will the takeover be complete by this summer?

    • Yes
      87
    • No
      183

Recommended Posts

Jackie Broon

Jackie Broon

Posted
Posted

Couldn’t sum it up any better than this, I’m quite sure O’Donoghue and De Marco are aware of the basics.

 

Steve

@oldheatonian

reporters and lawyers dipping in with opinion questioning a legal case they have no direct involvement in and more importantly without sighting of the case file nor spoken to the party bringing the case or any members of their legal team. Wow. That stirring the #nufc fan pot

 

I doubt the issue of standing is as cut and dried as some are suggesting. People are making the assumption that they can’t have standing because they’re just two fans, however, one or both of them are also likely to be customers of the club.

 

There could be an advantage in and reason for a case being brought by fans, according to the government guidance the CAT fast-track process is generally only open to individuals and small business. If the case were being brought by the club or consortium it might be less likely to be handled under the fast-track process.

 

CAT cases can be brought by customers, the guidance gives an example of a purchaser of a product who has had to pay more for it because the manufacturer or retailer has infringed competition law.

 

Just speculating but there are possibly ways that standing could be demonstrated in relation to any season ticket holder. We’re in a situation where the PL would rather keep an owner who has withheld refunds from season ticket holders in place than allow owners to take control who could potentially threaten the established big 6.

 

Even if the loss demonstrated is pennies, a big compensation pay-out clearly isn’t the goal here, it’s a judgement that the PL have breached competition law in their actions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scoot

Scoot

Posted
Posted

Couldn’t sum it up any better than this, I’m quite sure O’Donoghue and De Marco are aware of the basics.

 

Steve

@oldheatonian

reporters and lawyers dipping in with opinion questioning a legal case they have no direct involvement in and more importantly without sighting of the case file nor spoken to the party bringing the case or any members of their legal team. Wow. That stirring the #nufc fan pot

 

I doubt the issue of standing is as cut and dried as some are suggesting. People are making the assumption that they can’t have standing because they’re just two fans, however, one or both of them are also likely to be customers of the club.

 

There could be an advantage in and reason for a case being brought by fans, according to the government guidance the CAT fast-track process is generally only open to individuals and small business. If the case were being brought by the club or consortium it might be less likely to be handled under the fast-track process.

 

CAT cases can be brought by customers, the guidance gives an example of a purchaser of a product who has had to pay more for it because the manufacturer or retailer has infringed competition law.

 

Just speculating but there are possibly ways that standing could be demonstrated in relation to any season ticket holder. We’re in a situation where the PL would rather keep an owner who has withheld refunds from season ticket holders in place than allow owners to take control who could potentially threaten the established big 6.

 

Even if the loss demonstrated is pennies, a big compensation pay-out clearly isn’t the goal here, it’s a judgement that the PL have breached competition law in their actions.

 

 

I'm sure the QC the NCSL have employed would know and will have told them at a very early stage whether they had standing or not. Fuck what Luke Edward's has "been told". That dickhead has found a negative in everything about the takeover from the start just because he has no sources around the deal. Plus he loves Steve Bruce and we'll not even mention what he "was told" about Henry Mauriss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Twenties Unlaced

Twenties Unlaced

Posted
Posted

Couldn’t sum it up any better than this, I’m quite sure O’Donoghue and De Marco are aware of the basics.

 

Steve

@oldheatonian

reporters and lawyers dipping in with opinion questioning a legal case they have no direct involvement in and more importantly without sighting of the case file nor spoken to the party bringing the case or any members of their legal team. Wow. That stirring the #nufc fan pot

 

I doubt the issue of standing is as cut and dried as some are suggesting. People are making the assumption that they can’t have standing because they’re just two fans, however, one or both of them are also likely to be customers of the club.

 

There could be an advantage in and reason for a case being brought by fans, according to the government guidance the CAT fast-track process is generally only open to individuals and small business. If the case were being brought by the club or consortium it might be less likely to be handled under the fast-track process.

 

CAT cases can be brought by customers, the guidance gives an example of a purchaser of a product who has had to pay more for it because the manufacturer or retailer has infringed competition law.

 

Just speculating but there are possibly ways that standing could be demonstrated in relation to any season ticket holder. We’re in a situation where the PL would rather keep an owner who has withheld refunds from season ticket holders in place than allow owners to take control who could potentially threaten the established big 6.

 

Even if the loss demonstrated is pennies, a big compensation pay-out clearly isn’t the goal here, it’s a judgement that the PL have breached competition law in their actions.

 

Brilliantly described.

 

This is exactly what I believe is happening. There is a coordinated effort to establish that competition law has been breached. They know that they need to use an alternative approach to establish this quickly, which is why these two fans have been used. Once established they can move forward with the large piece of litigation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
James

James

Posted
Posted

CMA have just fined Compare the Market £18m for colluding with insurers to prevent lower insurance prices being advertised on other platforms.

 

It’s not specifically relevant to us but is shows the extent of power that can be wielded, it’s not about compensating the fans, the rulings and fines can be pretty major if unfair practice is identified.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotty66

Scotty66

Posted
Posted

Couldn’t sum it up any better than this, I’m quite sure O’Donoghue and De Marco are aware of the basics.

 

Steve

@oldheatonian

reporters and lawyers dipping in with opinion questioning a legal case they have no direct involvement in and more importantly without sighting of the case file nor spoken to the party bringing the case or any members of their legal team. Wow. That stirring the #nufc fan pot

 

I doubt the issue of standing is as cut and dried as some are suggesting. People are making the assumption that they can’t have standing because they’re just two fans, however, one or both of them are also likely to be customers of the club.

 

There could be an advantage in and reason for a case being brought by fans, according to the government guidance the CAT fast-track process is generally only open to individuals and small business. If the case were being brought by the club or consortium it might be less likely to be handled under the fast-track process.

 

CAT cases can be brought by customers, the guidance gives an example of a purchaser of a product who has had to pay more for it because the manufacturer or retailer has infringed competition law.

 

Just speculating but there are possibly ways that standing could be demonstrated in relation to any season ticket holder. We’re in a situation where the PL would rather keep an owner who has withheld refunds from season ticket holders in place than allow owners to take control who could potentially threaten the established big 6.

 

Even if the loss demonstrated is pennies, a big compensation pay-out clearly isn’t the goal here, it’s a judgement that the PL have breached competition law in their actions.

 

Brilliantly described.

 

This is exactly what I believe is happening. There is a coordinated effort to establish that competition law has been breached. They know that they need to use an alternative approach to establish this quickly, which is why these two fans have been used. Once established they can move forward with the large piece of litigation.

 

Didn't Mimms say ages ago that the legal team(s) were looking at different routes to exploit. This must have been what that meant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robster

Robster

Posted
Posted

None of it makes sense to me unsurprisingly and it’s frustrating as hell but I keep thinking this De Marco guy is meant to be some kind of football law genius and that gives me hope

 

Football Law genuis who wins most things v Football Club who lose most things

One of them is going to have to end their run

Link to post
Share on other sites
B-more Mag

B-more Mag

Posted
Posted

Club statement

 

Newcastle United has issued the following club statement on Thursday 19 November 2020:

 

“The Club has previously not commented on the arbitration it is pursuing against the Premier League (‘EPL’) with respect to its conduct relating to the proposed takeover because of the confidentiality clause in the EPL's rules.

 

"However, the Club is aware of public reports which state that, on 17 November, the EPL referred to legal proceedings with the Club (e.g. social media posts referring to the “Club’s own legal case”) in a letter to Newcastle supporters.

 

"The source of some of the reporting is said to be the EPL. It appears, therefore, that the EPL has leaked the contents of their letter to some of those commenting in the public domain.

 

"The Club understands that these will be matters of great concern to its fans and therefore considers that, in light of the information disclosed by the EPL, it has no choice but to respond and update its fans in response to this coverage.

 

"The Club makes no comment on the substance of the arbitration, but it can confirm that it has issued arbitration proceedings against the EPL.

 

"It is unclear when those proceedings will be resolved, given the approach of the EPL and its lawyers, Bird & Bird. Nevertheless, the Club will continue to use its best efforts to press for a fair, full and timely hearing of its claim.”

 

 

https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/latest-news/club-statement-19112020/

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...