Olympic Stadium; our day in court

Evening everyone

Not long back, so still collecting my thoughts. Bit of a rollercoaster. In football terms it feels a bit like Doncaster must have felt after that abandoned game at The Valley. The proceedings only got under way at 10.30, the open session concluded at just before 12.30 and we were only allowed back in at 4.30 to learn that of course the session could not conclude today and a new session would need to be arranged. While we were waiting outside before the 4.30 recall, the LLDC side came out and all of us instantly agreed that they had very smug looks- this sent our group into something close to despair. However after we were recalled and the Judge outlined the need for a further session, I spoke to the ICO lawyer and she assured me that nothing negative should be assumed. Most of the time, she said, was taken up with her questions of the LLDC (and not, as I had feared, LLDC filibustering). She seemed to be quietly confident.

The remarkable thing was that there is only one witness for the LLDC side, and she is the Finance Director. Before very long, I started to feel sorry for her. She has only been in the position since the turn of 2015, and clearly is not a commercial/marketing person. Several times one of the Tribunal people had to point out to her that she had not answered the question. Why field her, and not the CEO of that rabble? Where was Brady and anyone else from West Ham? the commercial director of Vinci/LS185? The most senior commercial person from E20 (allegedly an entity which would suffer commercial damage, but currently boasting only two employees)? I haven't yet had the chance to make that explicit point, but the Tribunal people have, I am sure already picked it up.

It is indeed really amazing that suddenly the LLDC have really dropped the emphasis on West Ham as the harmed entity. I asked her about that, and she pretty much seemed to say that West Ham's previous "robust" objections have been rowed back - but did not explain why.

She also seemed to accept our evidence whereby by modelling how Spurs would have used the OS this season so far, 71 days would have had to be reserved just up until Christmas for football usage - whereas the LLDC told the EC they have it for 75 days a year, and Sullivan claimed there are 340 spare days when the LLDC can rent it out. In short, they have misled the public on this point. We have also sown the seeds of doubt about whether West Ham have an effective veto over other clubs (not just footie) usage.

I did manage to get a late goal just before the ref abandoned the match. After the Judge explained why we would have to return, I pointed out that while I understand and accept what had happened, this latest delay was at a piece with the delays that had marked every single part of the FOI process from the day I submitted the question. The two lay judges showed distinct signs of readily accepting that point.



Thanks to all the Lifers who attended for their support. It definitely felt like a home game.