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

[St1pe]

I’m guessing arbitration hasn’t been fruitful if they’re pushing ahead with a court case?

[Kanj]

Believe this is a double-down. 

[Rocker]

2 minutes ago, Candi_Hills said:

From Simon Zekaria (whoever he is) on twitter:

The claim states that the failure of the takeover by a consortium of investors, including Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund, affected the ability of

@NUFC to compete in the Premier League

 

So Mike is bringing legal action against them because the (illegally) blocked takeover affected the club's ability to complete. That sounds like the compensation claim that so many people said he'd never be able to make. Am I misunderstanding anything?

The Claimant seeks:
(1) Damages for loss of profit or, alternatively, loss of opportunity.
(2) An injunction requiring the Defendant to withdraw the Director Decision and/or to reconsider the 
same.
(3) Interest.
(4) Costs.
(5) Such further or other relief as the Tribunal considers appropriate.

[Robster]

In short, is this a positive or negative development ?

[Big Geordie]

Interesting.......

[Alberto2005]

Just now, Robster said:

In short, is this a positive or negative development ?

Depends which thread you're reading.

[Big Geordie]

Just now, Robster said:

In short, is this a positive or negative development ?

He's gunning for the PL, it would seem. Big time.

[Ben]

Definitely DP this ( I didn't think I'd be typing that on the Internet this early in the evening) 

[nbthree3]

 

[B-more Mag]

At the risk of negative-pessamism-ing, I worry that this is an uphill battle:

Quote

The Claim states that the Defendant exercised its power to block the Proposed Takeover when it decided between June and September 2020 that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would be a director exercising “control” over NUFC, for the purposes of the Rules (“the Director Decision”). In reaching the Director Decision, the Defendant failed to apply the Rules in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory fashion and/or used its powers under the Rules for the improper purpose of promoting its own commercial interests and/or the interests of its business associates and/or certain of the PL member-clubs in a manner that was detrimental to competition and consumers.

I mean, maybe they do really have some evidence that the decision was pretextual, but there's pretty clearly a prima facie case that KSA would be a director applying the literal language of the rules.

[B-more Mag]

1 minute ago, Robster said:

In short, is this a positive or negative development ?

Yes, it is.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

1 minute ago, Robster said:

In short, is this a positive or negative development ?

Positive? 

We've won the arbitration case and now he's got the avenue to sue would be my guess

[B-more Mag]

 

1 minute ago, nbthree3 said:

 

"Because we didn't actually have standing ..." but, fine, take the win.

[Ben]

4 minutes ago, Big Geordie said:

He's gunning for the PL, it would seem. Big time.

Charners probably rang him today to tell him the good news about Gayles contract

" fuck this, Maureen pass my Nokia I'm making a tweet"

[Slim]

Least we can all admit Keith was right about the big announcement !

[AyeDubbleYoo]

5 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

Positive? 

We've won the arbitration case and now he's got the avenue to sue would be my guess

If we'd won arbitration though, wouldn't the PL have to reconsider their decision anyway? And they would do that without having to be sued, you'd think. 

It's confusing TBH.

[Candi_Hills]

I always like to hear what that Shell lass has to say when the legal process stuff comes out. No one on here's got a fucking clue.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

5 minutes ago, Candi_Hills said:

I always like to hear what that Shell lass has to say when the legal process stuff comes out. No one on here's got a fucking clue.

Neither has she. 

[RS]

7 minutes ago, Slim said:

Least we can all admit Keith was right about the big announcement !

What’s the announcement? The tax thing?

[Shearergol]

15 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

Positive? 

We've won the arbitration case and now he's got the avenue to sue would be my guess

That's not how it works

[Candi_Hills]

Just now, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

Neither has she. 

She has a clue about legal process. At least she can say what typically happens in certain types of cases.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

17 minutes ago, B-more Mag said:

At the risk of negative-pessamism-ing, I worry that this is an uphill battle:

I mean, maybe they do really have some evidence that the decision was pretextual, but there's pretty clearly a prima facie case that KSA would be a director applying the literal language of the rules.

Is there? It has to be a bit of leap, from a sovereign wealth fund providing some of the money for a deal, to the country itself being ordered to be assessed as a director of the company. Very complex and strange at the very least. 

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

 

1 minute ago, Candi_Hills said:

She has a clue about legal process. At least she can say what typically happens in certain types of cases.

There’s a few on here with the same amount of knowledge. 

[Candi_Hills]

2 minutes ago, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

 

There’s a few on here with the same amount of knowledge. 

Who? I know there's an American lawyer who chips in with his knowledge of their system.

[Shearergol]

Just now, Candi_Hills said:

Who? I know there's an American lawyer who chips in with his knowledge of their system.

Fantail's a copper, seems to know a fair bit about the law.