Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
«1345678

Comments

  • This could be very interesting.
  • Eventually liars always get found out, why is she still here?
  • Last season she had to go to Dubai to escape the rigours of a football club, this year she can go to court instead.
  • What's all this about the Safety Advisory Group meetings being disclosed? Why would the FOIA apply to Charlton? Or were they obtained via a disclosure from the Met Police?
    Has anyone seen them?
  • Go on Peter, sue the arse of the bitch
  • Excellent news
  • Would be helpful if they spelt Katrien Meire correctly at all times, hope they correct.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Would be helpful if they spelt Katrien Meire correctly at all times, hope they correct.

    Agreed. It's not that hard to spell Merde.
  • Would be helpful if they spelt Katrien Meire correctly at all times, hope they correct.

    Three different spellings in one article, that is poor. In keeping with the subject matter though to be fair.
  • cafcfan said:

    What's all this about the Safety Advisory Group meetings being disclosed? Why would the FOIA apply to Charlton? Or were they obtained via a disclosure from the Met Police?
    Has anyone seen them?

    Well, not knowing who is on the Safety Advisory Group, I wouldn't want to speculate, but...

    It is unlikely that CAFC is a public authority, within the meaning of the Act, and, so, I'd assume that any information would have been provided by an organisation that is a public authority. I'd even be surprised if they were covered by EIR (which has a wider remit).

    The Met and the Council (if they are in attendance) would be public authorities, and so subject to the Act; provided that they "held" the information - which, if they were provided with, or created their own, minutes of the meeting they would.

    As FOI is disclosure to the public, there is no reason why (if you knew who had provided the information) you should not be provided with a copy if you now asked.
  • Would be helpful if they spelt Katrien Meire correctly at all times, hope they correct.

    Will need to when the Writ is issued and served.
  • edited June 2016
    Ok so who is going to be the first to mention Colin in a post?

    Well done Mr Varney. Will be interesting to see how this pans out. All because Meire is too arrogant to make a simple retraction after again putting her foot in her mouth.
  • She can't be all bad surely ? Didn't our two latest signings thank her for all of her hard work :-)

    Did anyone get any comments about her from those just leaving ?
  • Varney must have very strong legal advice if he is going ahead
  • edited June 2016
    The safety committee is formally convened and chaired by Greenwich Council, which is the licensing authority, something we once had to explain to Roger Alwen. The club attends and indeed hosts it, but it does not control it, as that would be nonsense. It is there to hold the club to account.

    For that reason it is subject to FOI, although parts of the notes could be redacted by the police for operational reasons.
  • Sponsored links:


  • DRAddick said:

    All because Meire is too arrogant to make a simple retraction after again putting her foot in her mouth.



    Different magnitude of course but same scenario.

    Meire has refused to apologise on the OS (as requested by CAS Trust) for saying to a newspaper in Belgium that she didn't care about the history of the club. Now she will have to explain to her former University why they are seeking the revocation of her prestigious 2016 award presented in March at a special ceremony at Leuven in Belgium for her achievements as CEO at Charlton.
    is this correct? they are revoking the award? How embarrassing and congrats to you for pushing it.
  • edited June 2016
    Will Varney do a Jordan and serve her the court papers at an embarrassing moment? Say first home game or at a signing press conference, it would be funny but I doubt it as the man has too much class.
  • DRAddick said:

    All because Meire is too arrogant to make a simple retraction after again putting her foot in her mouth.



    Different magnitude of course but same scenario.

    Meire has refused to apologise on the OS (as requested by CAS Trust) for saying to a newspaper in Belgium that she didn't care about the history of the club. Now she will have to explain to her former University why they are seeking the revocation of her prestigious 2016 award presented in March at a special ceremony at Leuven in Belgium for her achievements as CEO at Charlton.
    is this correct? they are revoking the award? How embarrassing and congrats to you for pushing it.
    I think, although I stand to be corrected, that it is the Trust that is seeking the revocation.
  • Jayajosh said:

    Would be helpful if they spelt Katrien Meire correctly at all times, hope they correct.

    Will need to when the Writ is issued and served.
    You mean like when Katrien made Colin Powell redundant but addressed the papers to Chris Powell.
    But the pitch is lovely.
  • Legal action will be a waste of everyone's time because no matter how you read what she said, she actually never said Peter Varneys bid included a move away from the Valley. She actually said the words 'but a proposal LIKE that included'

    I'm just saying and I'm sure Peters lawyers will advise him so should be interesting.
  • Mametz said:

    DRAddick said:

    All because Meire is too arrogant to make a simple retraction after again putting her foot in her mouth.



    Different magnitude of course but same scenario.

    Meire has refused to apologise on the OS (as requested by CAS Trust) for saying to a newspaper in Belgium that she didn't care about the history of the club. Now she will have to explain to her former University why they are seeking the revocation of her prestigious 2016 award presented in March at a special ceremony at Leuven in Belgium for her achievements as CEO at Charlton.
    is this correct? they are revoking the award? How embarrassing and congrats to you for pushing it.
    I think, although I stand to be corrected, that it is the Trust that is seeking the revocation.
    that's correct, we are backing @Coyotejohn1947 , who is a Trust member

  • Legal action will be a waste of everyone's time because no matter how you read what she said, she actually never said Peter Varneys bid included a move away from the Valley. She actually said the words 'but a proposal LIKE that included'

    I'm just saying and I'm sure Peters lawyers will advise him so should be interesting.

    Peter is acting on the advice of his lawyers.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!