Chaisty: the EFL said on Aug 7th that the agreement was not conditional (as Mihail asserts) and that Elliott's application was rejected due to claims he mislead the EFL.
#cafc#SaveCAFC
As worded there, that looks like a bit of sleight of hand. Surely EFL weren't ruling that the agreement was not conditional, just saying they'd been told it wasn't? Who told them that?
Chaisty exploring possibility of Lex Dominus selling shares on. Says that is their right if they own them. If Nimer made wrong deal that’s his problem.
Can LK use the football club, fans ... the season on a whole as part of a defence?
EG its not just between Elliot and Nimer, the whole club is at stake?
It's legally nothing to do with football ffs.
Disagree. ESI 1 can argue that delay diminishes the asset because of the imminent start of the season and potentially removes the chance of a sale. Therefore an interim injunction should not be awarded.
Chaisty saying that it isn't his client's problem if a more preferential buyer has come along for Nimer. Says if a deal is already agreed then it is "tough".
Chaisty says Mihail argues that club could be expelled if Elliott owns club but remains disqualified however offers no evidence that is likely outcome.
Chaisty is actually starting to struggle now. Butting in on the Judge, putting forward suppositions and hypothetical scenarios and continue into waffling on, trying to put specific questions for the Judge to ask.
It's a machine gun attack, but using the same bullets time and time again.
Surely the shares are simply a share of the sale. If both sides agree that TS can buy the club on the terms he has agreed, cant they then argue who should have what for as long as they like? If Sandgaard is lost, they both lose his money.
Chaisty is actually starting to struggle now. Butting in on the Judge, putting forward suppositions and hypothetical scenarios and continue into waffling on, trying to put specific questions for the Judge to ask.
It's a machine gun attack, but using the same bullets time and time again.
This. I'd does feel like we've rounded this circle a few times
Can LK use the football club, fans ... the season on a whole as part of a defence?
EG its not just between Elliot and Nimer, the whole club is at stake?
It's legally nothing to do with football ffs.
Disagree. ESI 1 can argue that delay diminishes the asset because of the imminent start of the season and potentially removes the chance of a sale. Therefore an interim injunction should not be awarded.
LK can also argue that as it is Elliot wanting the injunction, he does not have the financial means to cover the other sides costs should the injunction be granted TS walk away and then Elliot lose the case at the full hearing.
Can LK use the football club, fans ... the season on a whole as part of a defence?
EG its not just between Elliot and Nimer, the whole club is at stake?
It's legally nothing to do with football ffs.
Disagree. ESI 1 can argue that delay diminishes the asset because of the imminent start of the season and potentially removes the chance of a sale. Therefore an interim injunction should not be awarded.
But that could be settle with damages at a later point.
My point was it doesn't matter legally, if its a football club, a house or a sweet shop. It's either been sold, has a contract of exclusiveity or it hasn't.
Comments
Unless Farnell has another chancer in the cupboard.
But. We have not had our say yet.☺️
Chaisty says Mihail argues that club could be expelled if Elliott owns club but remains disqualified however offers no evidence that is likely outcome.
I'd say about 3-0 down.
Need a mendonca like performance from our girl.
It's a machine gun attack, but using the same bullets time and time again.
My point was it doesn't matter legally, if its a football club, a house or a sweet shop. It's either been sold, has a contract of exclusiveity or it hasn't.