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)
Comments
-
Chaisty: We are looking for a short-term remedy in order to solve the matter with a trial0
-
If Nimer was coerced into unknowingly selling the club to a company owned by the lawyer (Farnell) who was supposed to be representing his interests, then I cannot see how that contract can be legally binding.
If Elliott is out of pocket, he should seek damages from Farnell.
Contrary to what their Barrister is saying, I think Farnell s role in this is extremely relevant.17 -
Leeds_Addick said:Is this guy just trying to get through to 5pm and force the whole thing to be extended?0
-
Laura opens up by singing
We hate millwall and we hate millwall.
Judge loves it.50 -
An early goal for the defence in the 2nd half,great start.....0
-
ForeverAddickted said:EFL board found that Elliott had been owner since June 8th.
Yet even Sandgaard said that the EFL had told him that it was Nimer who was the owner?0 -
queensland_addick said:If Nimer was coerced into unknowingly selling the club to a company owned by the lawyer (Farnell) who was supposed to be representing his interests, then I cannot see how that contract can be legally binding.
If Elliott is out of pocket, he should seek damages from Farnell.
Contrary to what their Barrister is saying, I think Farnell s role in this is extremely relevant.0 -
Surrey Chaisty 161-4
Kreamer batting now3 -
"not black and white"...…..the trouble with that comment (Laura) is that all Chaisty needs is 'grey' to win an injunction and go to court!
0 -
I hope Lauren comes up with something concrete very quickly.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
Well done Diego1
-
meldrew66 said:I hope Lauren comes up with something concrete very quickly.6
-
Diego has got better things to do that us sad fuckers watching this3
-
swords_alive said:
From 20 mins ago, just for the record-Chaisty: There is no evidence that this injunction will cause the club harm or deny it any benefitsChaisty: Elliott has made the point that Nimer has "washed his hands of the club"5 -
Kreamer outlining the structure of ESI and says Mihail is "clearly authorised" to give evidence on behalf of Panorama.
0 -
Kreamer says Mihail a director of Panorama and ESI. Says he has "relevant expertise" and that he is liaising with EFL and is involved day-to-day running of the club.
0 -
Imagine Chaisty as your complaining neighbour. He looks a right one!
1 -
Chaisty looks a really arrogant bastard.
Seems he can't really be arsed to be there.
4 -
Covered End said:Cafc43v3r said:Jints said:Cafc43v3r said:mattinfinland said: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?
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.2 -
Chunes said:bigstemarra said:Has that gobshite QC shut up yet?5
- Sponsored links:
-
Well Kent has won lets us hope LK has the same result7
-
Kreamer defends Mihail’s “expertise” on this matter as director of CAFC and the person dealing with the EFL after Chaisty pointed out that he was not a director of Panorama. Nimer’s English not good enough, hence Mihail bearing witness for him.
0 -
Maybe Chaisty was a bit hasty and got a bit complacent.
Fingers crossed0 -
Seems to have slowed down?0
-
-
Oh god, I am SO far behind on this. Expect the full bitesize sometime tomorrow
7 -
She's bringing up Farnell...4
-
LK brings up Farnell via Lex Dominus. This should get good.3
-
Lex Dominus was a company solely owned by Chris Farnell until 5th/6th June when PE took over
8 -
Indeed (cos someone had to provide it!!!);Kreamer says Mihail is the best-placed person to give evidence as he has been advising and running things on the ground
0
This discussion has been closed.