"Hard to see how grant if injunction would put the club at further risk."
"No explanation of how embargoes would be lifted if the injunction is refused. "
THEY'D BE FREE TO SELL IT TO SOMEONE WHO IS LEGITIMATE AND WEALTHY ENOUGH TO PASS THE EFL TESTS.
OK, MM's evidence is crap but what's so hard to figure out Judges?
The problem is that none of PM's evidence says that. The judges weigh up the evidence before them. PM have failed to produce even the most basic explanation of why an embargo is bad, why we need a new owner, how LD not having anybody who's passed EFL tests will lead to further punishments, that TS is on the verge of buying, etc.
PM have royally fucked this and presumably LK would have been begging them for evidence to help her, so we can only assume they've fucked it deliberately. The question is why, I can't see why they'd bother going to court if they didn't want to win.
So what about all this 'done deal' stuff we heard last week then? Essentially we cannot be sold by ESI until they figure out who actually owns it - version 1 or version 2.
Surely we can appeal their injunction or get an injunction against their injunction, and then appeal when they try to get an injunction against our injunction injunction? Seems to be how this works.
It went against us in a fair and open court hearing and appealed in the highest court of appeal in the country, in public. Everything was above board and in the open. It went the wrong way, but no-one can say the system failed. The judge wasn't to blame. The lawyers weren't to blame. The appeal court judges weren't to blame. What failed Charlton - yet again - was the machinations, collusion and deceit of unpalatable, inappropriate owners. We got stiffed, but we will come out of this, somehow.
So far, the bad guys are winning. But they won't win in the end. So it's not yet the end.
So presumably if the EFL had just rejected the OADT appeal then the Judge would have proof that the club was in danger of going out of business?
I think so. Because the future of the football club wouldn't be in doubt.
The EFL would not be able to stop Elliott owning us if he won the November trial. But the court today would have the evidence required that the club's future was in doubt (i.e. how can it not be if it's owned by someone the EFL will not let own it and play under their rules).
Wow......just, wow. I bloody told you that our defence failed to present a single scrap of factual evidence to support their 'fears' about the impact on the club. They failed the first time round and failed to learn from their mistake this time. Where is the 'whatever' from the EFL about the embargo, the OADT updated position etc? Where is the statement about/from TS that he is ready to go but will talk away if delayed and place the club at risk? All/any of that would have made a difference to the outcome.
Comments
PM have royally fucked this and presumably LK would have been begging them for evidence to help her, so we can only assume they've fucked it deliberately. The question is why, I can't see why they'd bother going to court if they didn't want to win.
Will Charlton even exist as a club by November if PE is allowed to be in charge?
EFL, you cannot sit and wait until November 23rd.
Even our legal 'in the knowers' know fu*k all!!
Panorama's case was pretty awful
Only if neither ES1 or ES2 own the club
It went against us in a fair and open court hearing and appealed in the highest court of appeal in the country, in public. Everything was above board and in the open. It went the wrong way, but no-one can say the system failed. The judge wasn't to blame. The lawyers weren't to blame. The appeal court judges weren't to blame. What failed Charlton - yet again - was the machinations, collusion and deceit of unpalatable, inappropriate owners. We got stiffed, but we will come out of this, somehow.
So far, the bad guys are winning. But they won't win in the end. So it's not yet the end.
Still... fuck.
The EFL would not be able to stop Elliott owning us if he won the November trial. But the court today would have the evidence required that the club's future was in doubt (i.e. how can it not be if it's owned by someone the EFL will not let own it and play under their rules).
the saddest thing of all is having heard the evidence I don’t see how they could have found another verdict.
Wow......just, wow. I bloody told you that our defence failed to present a single scrap of factual evidence to support their 'fears' about the impact on the club. They failed the first time round and failed to learn from their mistake this time. Where is the 'whatever' from the EFL about the embargo, the OADT updated position etc? Where is the statement about/from TS that he is ready to go but will talk away if delayed and place the club at risk? All/any of that would have made a difference to the outcome.
It's a joke.