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

ESI 1 v ESI 2 - Initial Hearing 01-02/09/2020, Court of Appeal 17/09/2020 (p127)

18990929495175

Comments

  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    From what was said on here earlier I believe they can do both
  • Options
    Surely if TS buys us for £1 that is the size of the pot.

    Personally I don't want Southall getting anything. If he had not try to do his con we would never have heard of Farnell and Paul Elliott would be an ex players name not a con mans. 
  • Options
    IdleHans said:
    Wonder if we are breaking the law commenting on here as the hearing goes on?

    Why would that be breaking the law ? 
    You are not supposed to report on a case while it is in progress. Judge was clear on that in his opening remarks. 
    perhaps this should have been members only then .....
  • Options
    From my limited understanding...

    This case has always been and still is Elliotts shell co. V Nimers shell co.

    The club can still be sold, the decision yesterday still stands, nothing happening today in regards to the appeal will overturn that.

    The "prosecution" have in their opening statement admited that it's likely a sale will go ahead and be completed before the trial date in November.

    At this point it's making sure that Elliots co. Have a claim in should the courts at the appeal trial decode that yes, their sale agreement was breached. The outcome of that I imagine would be...

    Elliott's legal fees paid
    Compensation to at least the sum of what "he" "put in" probably a bit more on top. This would be billed to Panaroma magic (Nimer)


    Compo would be the price that TS buys ESI from Nimer for i would have thought. 
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Court of appeal. 
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Directly to The Court of Appeal
  • Options
    We're into some dull date stuff now. It's at this stage that I think about making a cup of tea.
  • Options
    edited September 2020
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Court of appeal. 
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Directly to The Court of Appeal
    Cheers... If anything else is good coming from this its learning more about how the Courts themselves work
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Directly to The Court of Appeal
    How long does that take?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    The appeal will have no consequences for Thomas Sandgaard if he is owner before then. It will simply be a case of ESI2 fighting for some of the lucre ESI1 have grabbed from the sale. Nimer can run away but Matt Southall can't. There is now a strong incentive for Nimer selling the club for a relatively small fee as that might persuade ESI2 to drop their interest given the costs involved and lack of certainty that those could be awarded as well. 
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    From what was said on here earlier I believe they can do both
    Then the club will still be under a temporary injunction until the appeal is heard, no?
  • Options
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Court of appeal. 
    but that will take weeks and won't stop a sale going ahead
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    From what was said on here earlier I believe they can do both
    Then the club will still be under a temporary injunction until the appeal is heard, no?

    no 
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    From what was said on here earlier I believe they can do both
    Then the club will still be under a temporary injunction until the appeal is heard, no?
    no
  • Options
    The law is solid in this area as it effectively underlines the intention of each party.
  • Options
    The appeal will have no consequences for Thomas Sandgaard if he is owner before then. It will simply be a case of ESI2 fighting for some of the lucre ESI1 have grabbed from the sale. Nimer can run away but Matt Southall can't. There is now a strong incentive for Nimer selling the club for a relatively small fee as that might persuade ESI2 to drop their interest given the costs involved and lack of certainty that those could be awarded as well. 
    Or take £650k - which means Southall has £350k and leave him to face the music 

  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    From what was said on here earlier I believe they can do both
    Then the club will still be under a temporary injunction until the appeal is heard, no?
    That's what I thought as well but according to most on here it doesn't seem like it
  • Options
    MattF said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    How can they do this?
    Directly to The Court of Appeal
    How long does that take?
    Got to lodge in 14 days iirc, could take months though to be heard. 
  • Options
    Richard J said:
    Surely if TS buys us for £1 that is the size of the pot.

    Personally I don't want Southall getting anything. If he had not try to do his con we would never have heard of Farnell and Paul Elliott would be an ex players name not a con mans. 
    ESI are getting a lot more than £1 from TS. Unbelievable but true. 

    The damages could stretch further because ESI let Elliott put money in. I think Elliott has a strong case against them but I also don't care because we should be owned by TS by then :)
  • Options
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    Is the judge allowing an appeal, or are they pursuing an appeal in spite of the judge? 
    From what was said on here earlier I believe they can do both
    Then the club will still be under a temporary injunction until the appeal is heard, no?
    no
    Great.
  • Options
    Can't help but like this judge.
    A human being - totally unlike the pompous farts we hear about so often. 

    ...and to think that, pre-hearing, we were reading complaints about his behaviour and decision-making. Like you PM, I thought he was ok when I was watching yesterday.
  • Options
    edited September 2020
    MattF said:
    Chaisty's surely wondering through all this when he will be paid having heard yesterday his client couldn't pay a £1
    he is paid by the Solicitors who appointed him, it wouldn't have even crossed his mind. They could have insisted on monies on account before proceeding.
  • Options
    The appeal will have no consequences for Thomas Sandgaard if he is owner before then. It will simply be a case of ESI2 fighting for some of the lucre ESI1 have grabbed from the sale. Nimer can run away but Matt Southall can't. There is now a strong incentive for Nimer selling the club for a relatively small fee as that might persuade ESI2 to drop their interest given the costs involved and lack of certainty that those could be awarded as well. 
    If PE has loaned/given money to the club to pay wages, I imagine TS will return it to him?
  • Options
    Chunes said:

    Then the club will still be under a temporary injunction until the appeal is heard, no?
    No. There is no injunction. The judge can say "I will let you appeal" or "I won't let you appeal". If the latter, then it's off to the Court of Appeal to argue that the judge was wrong in law to not allow an appeal. 
  • Options
    He's asking for an appeal..
  • Options
    Has anyone run across the courtroom yet and dropped a roundhouse on Chaisty?
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!