Jump to content

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


Yorkie

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

45 minutes ago, RS said:

Fear not. We have the full support of the Saudi Secret Service raking through this lots email history. We’ll be alreet. 


They couldn’t organise an assassination in an embassy that lot!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact Beloff worked for the PL on certain matters as the O&D test is enough conflict of interest. Recall this wasn’t disclosed until after both sides agreed to him. Whether that was oversight by Ashley’s side or lack of proper disclosure from Beloff or the PL is up for anyone’s interpretation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kanji said:

The fact Beloff worked for the PL on certain matters as the O&D test is enough conflict of interest. Recall this wasn’t disclosed until after both sides agreed to him. Whether that was oversight by Ashley’s side or lack of proper disclosure from Beloff or the PL is up for anyone’s interpretation. 

Isn’t it already established that it was down to lack of disclosure by Beloff? Then after it was noted and Utd objected, he offered to leave to the PL but they turned his offer down?

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Kanji said:

The fact Beloff worked for the PL on certain matters as the O&D test is enough conflict of interest. Recall this wasn’t disclosed until after both sides agreed to him. Whether that was oversight by Ashley’s side or lack of proper disclosure from Beloff or the PL is up for anyone’s interpretation. 

https://littletonchambers.com/articles-webinars/rare-public-judgment-on-s-24-application-for-removal-of-arbitrator/

 

Wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Manxst said:

Isn’t it already established that it was down to lack of disclosure by Beloff? Then after it was noted and Utd objected, he offered to leave to the PL but they turned his offer down?

If that’s the case he could have still stepped down regardless of what the PL wanted.

 

 

Edited by FloydianMag

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

If that’s the case he could have still stepped down regardless of what the PL wanted.

 

 

 

Don’t know. Joeys post above explains it. Sounds like he engaged via private emails with the PL and they both came to the conclusion that they’d prefer him to stay on. For some reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

Regardless, the club still wanted to make the point he could show bias before any arbitration took place.

 

I don't buy the 'club wanted to make a point' stuff. The club thought that Beloff should have been removed and lost that argument.

 

I personally (and admittedly completely unqualified to do so) think the decision was flawed and probably challengeable (I see High Court decisions overturned by the Court of Appeal all the time in my line of work, so they're not infallible). Basically the Judge said that the arbitration is just about section A (which is just definitions) not section F (the O&D test) which Beloff forgot to disclose he had given advise on changes to. However, fundamentally section A is just definitions, those definitions only have meaning in relation to the rules themselves, which in this case is section F, so I can't see how the Judge could conclude that section A is a completely separate matter to section F. It just would have taken too long to appeal it.

 

 

Edited by Jackie Broon

Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be a daft question but.....

 

Does any one know if the O&D test has changed in the time since the takeover began?

 

And if so, which version of the O&D will they use?

 

I wouldnt put it past the sneaky fuckers at the PL to make the O&D test stricter  more robust.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it has changed and also pretty sure they are using the old version for us because the deal was struck before the changes came in.

 

I could be wrong though and can’t remember where I read it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

This might be a daft question but.....

 

Does any one know if the O&D test has changed in the time since the takeover began?

 

And if so, which version of the O&D will they use?

 

I wouldnt put it past the sneaky fuckers at the PL to make the O&D test stricter  more robust.

 

Yes, it was changed in January, the section 'Acquisition of Control' (F24-27) was added. I assume they will be using the rules at the time that the declaration was submitted in April 2020. Even if they are using the new version, there have been no changes to the definitions in section A that are being considered in the arbitration.

 

 

Edited by Jackie Broon

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, manorpark said:

 

Careful !!

 

I've said exactly that on here loads of times, and some members here just "cannot stand it", they just pull you to bits for fun, it is so self-destructive for NUFC.

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!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

K, I asked this yesterday and nobody answered so maybe a stupid question but will try again:

 

1) who are the arbitrators, are they appointed solely by the premier league or are they completely independent?

2) is there a feasible route Ashley et al could take this over and above the PL should it fail, such CAS or whatever, or is that absolutely the end?

 

I'm aware there's the CAT case just wondered about this specifically, surely the PL are governed by some body so if they reject how come there's no one to appeal to?

 

Re: 2), the arbitration is final and non-appealable, per PL rules. I don't know U.K. law on this, but if it were in the U.S. there would be very limited circumstances in which a court could overturn an arbitration award that's purportedly final and non-appealable, but it takes extraordinary circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FloydianMag said:

As far as I understand it, one is appointed by the PL, one by the club, the third one is independent (supposedly) however the independent person, a lawyer has done work for the PL previously.?

 

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, B-more Mag said:

 

Re: 2), the arbitration is final and non-appealable, per PL rules. I don't know U.K. law on this, but if it were in the U.S. there would be very limited circumstances in which a court could overturn an arbitration award that's purportedly final and non-appealable, but it takes extraordinary circumstances.

 

The legislative basis for the arbitration is the Arbitration Act 1996, that allows appeal on a point of law. Irrespective of what it says in the PL's rules I don't think they could override the right to appeal in primary legislation. Seems to be a common theme in the PL's rules to go above and beyond UK law with no legislative basis to do so.

 

Although, if the arbitration fails I would think the fall-back will be the CAT case rather than an appeal, but I think that would be more likely to be for compensation rather than a route to the takeover because it will take too long.

 

 

Edited by Jackie Broon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...