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
-
Is the solution here that Sandgaard takes ownership of the club by paying an amount that both ESI versions agree to but which is held by a third party until ESIv1 and ESIv2 settle who gets what between them?5
-
blackpool72 said:Laura opens up by singing
We hate millwall and we hate millwall.
Judge loves it.
It's Lauren - you should get this right as she is the new queen of Charlton
3 -
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
-
Go Lauren!0
-
FFS......CHASTITY BELT UP!!!0
-
GET HIM GIRL!!!0
-
here we go...
0 -
Smashed him!!!0
-
Not sure about that. Made a very powerful point when he accused Mouthall of stealing the money for the Range Rovers and bitches.ForeverAddickted said:3 -
Here we go...!0
- Sponsored links:
-
Did she just quote Farnell in every role for every party?14
-
Farnell
BOOM14 -
I’m now on the train on the way to the work for a night shift. I’ve got the match day nerves not being able to view the hearing. Come on Ms Kraemer deliver a deserved victory for the Charlton fans please.2
-
Christ! How many freakin' hats did Farnell actually have on????? ;-)4
-
Kreamer points out Farnell owned Lex Dominus until June 5th/6th. SPA was agreed under Farnell who was wearing about half a dozen different hats.
9 -
She is calling out Farnell’s multiple conflicts of interests!33
-
Next 10 minutes seem crucial with what =Lauren is about to state to be the evidence of 'the injunction representing abusive behaviour'
0 -
Laura calls this case an abuse.5
-
SRA investigation brought up @CAFCsayer34
-
And that he is under SRA investigation11
- Sponsored links:
-
Anyone want an autograph?
57 -
Lauren, not Laura11
-
Here we go:Kreamer says Nimer's decision to sell the club came out of Southall's misspending1
-
Said earlier that if PE had anything concrete then his lawyer would have said so. If all you can do is trash the opposition you don't have much of a case.ForeverAddickted said:Kreamer for Panorama says that Chaisty hasn’t referred to his own client’s evidence, which she says is scant and incoherent.7 -
BANG - HERE WE GO0
-
If Lauren pulls this off, Mrs Otto better get used to me calling her Name out when we are having our monthly bunk up. The good news is Mrs Otto is called Lauren as well - so I can’t go wrong.64
-
BANG!!
Farnell's conflict of interest is being outlined. What was that, acting for 5/6 companies on the buy/sale side? I lost count.
8 -
Go for the jugular Lauren!
5 -
Clear the Panorama case is going to revolve around conflict of interest by Farnell who is the subject of two SRA complains. Unable to comply with duty of confidentiality given the number of roles he had, says Kreamer.
2
This discussion has been closed.
