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

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

1…2223252728…175

Comments

  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,302
    Chaisty says Mihail's evidence should be treated with extreme caution and care. He says his client wants speedy resolution. Although they are seeking interim order at this juncture.
  • WSS
    WSS Posts: 25,070
    carly burn said:
    Elliott's Lawyer concentrating on mistruths in Mihails statement.

    Nimer failed to put any finance into the club. Elliott did in June
    Bit stupid when you don't own the club.
  • i_b_b_o_r_g
    i_b_b_o_r_g Posts: 18,948
    A QC might know his gravy, but not if he gets told a load of bollocks by his client
  • NorthheathAddick
    NorthheathAddick Posts: 4,017
    carly burn said:
    Elliott understands the need for a swift resolution
    Then why doesn’t he just FUCK OFF....!!!!😡🤬🤬🤬
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,302
    Chaisty says his clients understand the necessity for a speedy conclusion and are extremely anxious for this matter to proceed quickly. #cafc #SaveCAFC
  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    I know you only judge a wicket after both teams have had a knock, but this isn't a great start. 
  • JoshrewCAFC
    JoshrewCAFC Posts: 916
    I hope I'm wrong here but can't see Elliott losing this case...
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,302
    Chaisty says his clients are anxious to progress matters, but Mihail has not shown any evidence about state of negotiations for sale to other, just referrred to third party press reports.
  • swords_alive
    swords_alive Posts: 4,257


    Chaisty: "I ask you to treat his (Mihail's) evidence with extreme caution.
  • Sponsored links:



  • SoundAsa£
    SoundAsa£ Posts: 22,476
    Carry on Courting.
  • mistrollingin62
    mistrollingin62 Posts: 377
    Where's NLA when you need him B)
  • CL_Phantom
    CL_Phantom Posts: 5,513
    Surely Elliott putting money in (dubious) and Nimer not putting any in is irrelevant. The club was operating financially, yes?
  • carly burn
    carly burn Posts: 19,458
    Sounds like there is some paperwork stating the transfer of shares from ESI1 to 2?
  • Valley11
    Valley11 Posts: 11,983
    edited September 2020
    Indeed. Elliot seems to be arguing that he believed the deal with him was watertight and as such, put money into the club.
    That sounds quite a strong defence to me??
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,302
    Chaisty says contract to sell is signed and not in dispute. Drag along provisions re Southall activated in May.
  • Redvalleyeast
    Redvalleyeast Posts: 4,689
    carly burn said:
    Elliott understands the need for a swift resolution
    So do we. Fuck off,that swift enough for you Elliottttt?
  • Todds_right_hook
    Todds_right_hook Posts: 10,880
    But if there is a clause saying subject to efl approval, then surely no case
  • cafcfan1990
    cafcfan1990 Posts: 12,811
    Valley11 said:
    Indeed. Elliot seems to be arguing that he believed the deal with him was watertight and as such, put money into the club.
    That sounds quite a strong defence to me??
    It does yes. So why is he not listed as the owner of ESI on Companies House. I'm sure we'll hear that question soon. 
  • carly burn
    carly burn Posts: 19,458
    Southall effectively out of the picture
  • Sponsored links:



  • Valley27000
    Valley27000 Posts: 3,417
    CL_Phantom said:
    Surely Elliott putting money in (dubious) and Nimer not putting any in is irrelevant. The club was operating financially, yes?
    He has not got the funds too run Charlton FC .
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 47,728
    edited September 2020
    Valley11 said:
    Indeed. Elliot seems to be arguing that he believed the deal with him was watertight and as such, put money into the club.
    That sounds quite a strong defence to me??
    Yes, it does sound pretty strong if there is paperwork relating to the transfer of shares. 
  • WSS
    WSS Posts: 25,070
    Valley27000 said:
    CL_Phantom said:
    Surely Elliott putting money in (dubious) and Nimer not putting any in is irrelevant. The club was operating financially, yes?
    He has not got the funds too run Charlton FC .
    That's irrelevant in this case.
  • Chunes
    Chunes Posts: 17,347
    Seems like the legal defence is that granting the injunction will cause harm to the club? But ESI lawyer saying no proof presented that any other negotiations are close to being completed. 
  • robinofottershaw
    robinofottershaw Posts: 1,921
    Will wait to hear Laura Kreamer speak for Panorama Magic but........
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,302
    No necessity to join Southall to the action as no indication he will resist sale.
  • ozaddick
    ozaddick Posts: 2,844
    Valley11 said:
    Indeed. Elliot seems to be arguing that he believed the deal with him was watertight and as such, put money into the club.
    That sounds quite a strong defence to me??
    Not necessarily. It’s like test driving a car and replacing a bald tyre that went flat on the test. Doesn’t mean you own the car. 
  • carly burn
    carly burn Posts: 19,458
    The EFL haven't obviously helped our case
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,302
    Chaisty says deal was signed by both parties in May and that Southall's shares would transfer over as part of "drag along". Also says no indications Southall would try to sell his stake - which he can't do legally anyway.
  • Stig
    Stig Posts: 29,021
    guinnessaddick said:
    Don’t remember crown court being like this.

    "You, the jury, decide" - I wish.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories

“Marketplace”