The fact that the pound was never "paid" is not relevant. The pound represents a consideration. Not paying the pound doesn't void the contract, it merely opens up a separate action in debt. In other words, Elliot not paying the pound simply means he owes a pound.
Further: DICHAND v HYDRAREDOX TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LIMITED
What if there's a contractual condition that it has to be paid within say 14 days?
Then one party owes the other party a pound (or a dollar, or a euro, or whatever...) and can be sued for it.
The fact that the pound was never "paid" is not relevant. The pound represents a consideration. Not paying the pound doesn't void the contract, it merely opens up a separate action in debt. In other words, Elliot not paying the pound simply means he owes a pound.
Further: DICHAND v HYDRAREDOX TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LIMITED
Can we keep other results off of this thread please.
Kreamer making case that it would "doubtless be possible" for a court to come up with compensation for Lex Dominus in the future.
She says there would be huge damage caused to the club if an injunction is obtained.
I think it is going to trial but if the EFL appeal fails before then, maybe it will be settled. LK has done ok but MM and EFL have stuffed us up I think.
Kreamer refers to the fate of Bury, making the point that damages awarded subsequently could not put loss right if #cafc expelled from the EFL, whereas Lex faces only a potential commercial loss.
Kreamer pointing out that all the language used by Farnell in rep of Panorama against Southall on July 13th referred to Panorama's ownership as current. Also points out Farnell claimed Lex Dominus were "seeking" to buy the club.
I have said earlier that the mismatch of experience of the Barristers was nothing to worry about.
I was encouraged when I saw LK was a Trust Board member because it meant that she would have a grasp of the detail that her opponent wouldn't. The facts are the facts.
The one negative is MM seems to have dropped a few clangers, but if the £1 hasn't been paid then surely its a shut case.
Chaisty repeatedly mentioned that Mihail didn't disclose info on potential new buyers. Kreamer points out that Mihail can't release commercially sensitive info.
Comments
Can we have the inquest after, not during.
Go Lauren.
I was encouraged when I saw LK was a Trust Board member because it meant that she would have a grasp of the detail that her opponent wouldn't. The facts are the facts.
The one negative is MM seems to have dropped a few clangers, but if the £1 hasn't been paid then surely its a shut case.