AyeDubbleYoo Posted May 25, 2021 Share Posted May 25, 2021 (edited) Can anyone do a quick update of how the arbitration is ‘expedited’. We’ve already delayed it several months. I haven’t been following that closely, soz. Edited May 25, 2021 by AyeDubbleYoo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted May 25, 2021 Share Posted May 25, 2021 21 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Can anyone do a quick update of how the arbitration is ‘expedited’. We’ve already delayed it several months. I haven’t been following that closely, soz. I don't think anyone outside of the process knows exactly what the effect of it being expedited is. We know from the High Court judgement that the arbitration is following the PL's process but the arbitration rules in the PL handbook are pretty vague and don't shed any light on how an expedited process would be different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted May 25, 2021 Share Posted May 25, 2021 10 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Can anyone do a quick update of how the arbitration is ‘expedited’. We’ve already delayed it several months. I haven’t been following that closely, soz. Well, the process would normally take a lot longer but the courts are less busy at the moment so it can be fast tracked. But yes I agree, the requested delays are setting that back a bit. My opinion on it right now is that the delays in the arbitration case are no bad thing but a longer delay in the CAT doesn't help us. We want disclosure, we want that evidence so it can be used in the arbitration case. June 11th is when they submit their challenge for jurisdiction. If we lose that I think the game is up. Don't expect a quick decision, they're going to hand over a mountain of crap for the judge to mull over, taking up as much time as possible as if they can get this starting after the arbitration case begins properly, they'll see that as a win too. If the judge rules in our favour and it begins quickly, that will be good for us. They could settle ASAP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 38 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: I can't see how that could affect the jurisdiction of the CAT. That would be like a rule saying the clubs should only report criminal offences the PL, not the police. Even if would breach the rule it wouldn't affect the jurisdiction of the police to investigate. I also think it would probably be an unfair contract term if used in that way to preclude access to the CAT. That would be the case if it were an enforcement matter by the Competition and Markets Authority or something like that, but this is just a private action. 49 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: Actually it's St James Holdings Limited V the PL. It may be able to get somewhere with that argument (i.e., that it's not a party to the arbitration agreement), the fact that it's the sole owner of the club may complicate it, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 Obviously you’re far more qualified than me to give an opinion on this but, as far as I understand it, if the club is deemed to have broken that rule the consequence would potentially be disciplinary action via the disciplinary procedures set out in the rules. The PL’s rules could not restrict the jurisdiction of the CAT or otherwise remove rights of access to other forms of legal process (unless there were a specific statutory provision for allowing the removal of such rights). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 Just now, Jackie Broon said: Obviously you’re far more qualified than me to give an opinion on this but, as far as I understand it, if the club is deemed to have broken that rule the consequence would potentially be disciplinary action via the disciplinary procedures set out in the rules. The PL’s rules could not restrict the jurisdiction of the CAT or otherwise remove rights of access to other forms of legal process (unless there were a specific statutory provision for allowing the removal of such rights). Since when does breaking the rules result in an actual punishment (cough ESL) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 7 hours ago, Jackie Broon said: Obviously you’re far more qualified than me to give an opinion on this Not really. 7 hours ago, gjohnson said: as far as I understand it, if the club is deemed to have broken that rule the consequence would potentially be disciplinary action via the disciplinary procedures set out in the rules. The PL’s rules could not restrict the jurisdiction of the CAT or otherwise remove rights of access to other forms of legal process (unless there were a specific statutory provision for allowing the removal of such rights). Yeah, I don't know how that works under U.K. law. On a really quick look I didn't find anything right on point (though I did find a U.K. case where a court stayed a competition case pending resolution of underlying arbitration, but it wasn't a CAT case and wasn't the same type of competition claim). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 This takeover is not happening is it ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 12 minutes ago, Ben said: This takeover is not happening is it ? No. But don’t let that stop you being distracted from the lack of transfer activity, Bruce being in charge, shit football, a lack of protests and no ambition. Uncle Mike is on our side. He’s spending the deposit money on a fruitless public court case... That’s right, it’s not even his own money he needs to use to carry on this whole charade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 that’s some effort for a charade mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 Just now, reefatoon said: that’s some effort for a charade mind. It’s no-lose in reality for him, isn’t it? £17m to spend, not a single penny is his own. Lose the case? Drags on for two years and keeps him away from the pressure of doing anything remotely ambitious. Small chance of winning? Great. The takeover happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumbheed Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 7 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: It’s no-lose in reality for him, isn’t it? £17m to spend, not a single penny is his own. Lose the case? Drags on for two years and keeps him away from the pressure of doing anything remotely ambitious. Small chance of winning? Great. The takeover happens. All of the £17m belongs to him... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 16 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: It’s no-lose in reality for him, isn’t it? £17m to spend, not a single penny is his own. Lose the case? Drags on for two years and keeps him away from the pressure of doing anything remotely ambitious. Small chance of winning? Great. The takeover happens. I think he might be a bit pissed off if his £ 300 million pound sale doesn't go through. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 17 minutes ago, Robster said: I think he might be a bit pissed off if his £ 300 million pound sale doesn't go through. Probably. But he’s had plenty of opportunities to sell us before, obviously wasn’t too bothered then. He’ll be more bothered about keeping his relationship open with the Saudi’s. 30 minutes ago, Thumbheed said: All of the £17m belongs to him... Money he never had - a gambling man like Ashley is more than willing to take a punt, especially if it’s money he never started with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 1 hour ago, Ben said: This takeover is not happening is it ? It has always been happening, it is just a matter of WHEN. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamish Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 4 minutes ago, manorpark said: It has always been happening, it is just a matter of WHEN. If it has always been happening why did the Saudis walk away? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 6 minutes ago, manorpark said: It has always been happening, it is just a matter of WHEN. Confidence is something people have before they fully understand that situation. Right now it's heads or tails. Heads - the judge rules against the PL in their jurisdiction claim. Shit then gets real for them. They settle. We get our takeover. Tails - the judge rules with the PL and the CAT case gets stopped in it's tracks. It then goes to arbitration and they also make a judgement that the PL were correct in insisting KSA be a director. What's left of the takeover just fizzles away and we carry on with our living nightmare of Mike Ashley owning the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 7 minutes ago, Beamish said: If it has always been happening why did the Saudis walk away? If you have followed this at all over the last year, you would know that they have not walked away from the Consortium. You would know that they publicly stated that they had walked away, to the EPL. You would know that (1) Arbitration and (2) The Competition Case, would not have started (TWO separate expensive legal cases) if there was no point in starting them, and there would be no point in starting them if the Saudies had (actually) walked away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veriaqa Posted May 26, 2021 Share Posted May 26, 2021 (edited) The British legal system is bent. The Saudi has walked away long time ago. All this CAT and arbitration thing is just a "play" to enable Mike Ashley lies about the upcoming transfer window. Just lock the thread already. Now, take a deep breath and repeat this mantra: "Ashley is here forever" Edited May 27, 2021 by veriaqa Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 The negative wankers are just as annoying, if not more so, as the positive wankers. Nobody fucking knows. Chill out for a minute, god damn. Live your life, go for a walk, find a hobby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 6 hours ago, Kaizero said: The negative wankers are just as annoying, if not more so, as the positive wankers. Nobody fucking knows. Chill out for a minute, god damn. Live your life, go for a walk, find a hobby. Realism is best, in fact it is the 'only' way to be. Just look at the information we have, then join up all the dots, and you come to the ONLY answer - the logical answer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 I'm desperate for the takeover to happen, but the people that don't want this deal to go through far outnumber the people that do and they are doing a great job of kicking the can down the road. Over a year now and we are still no further forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 11 minutes ago, Ben said: Over a year now and we are still no further forward. Why would you think that, with two very (very) winnable legal procedures taking place over the next few weeks and months? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 1 minute ago, manorpark said: Why would you think that, with two very (very) winnable legal procedures taking place over the next few weeks and months? Because 12 months ago a deal was in place to buy the club and we just needed to pass the O&D test. Now there is no deal in place, the deal has been blocked with two complex legal procedures in the way. It’s hardly rocket science. You’re in the wrong thread posting your unrealistic nonsense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964 Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 Newcastle have been in very winnable positions innumerable times and lost, the fact that you admit it's winnable falls below your usual standard of zealously banging the drum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts