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
-
Probably going to take the Judge a few mins just to bypass the advertising on that site...4
-
Correct, but most people didn't appear to understand that there was a danger that the judge could grant an appeal which would be heard before a sale and possibly then preventing the sale.LargeAddick said:
just means if an appeal was to be heard in two weeks the sale would need to go through by then. I don't think he'll grant it but leave it to them to go to the Court of Appeal which means it will take even longer.Covered End said:
Correct. The danger is if Pearce does grant an appeal, which is heard before a sale can go through.LargeAddick said:
if Pearce doesn't grant leave to appeal then they can appeal directly to the Court of Appeal but it will be too late to stop a sale to TS or another party. This is all about getting their 'fair' share of whatever ESI sell to TNS for.Covered End said:
They want an appeal to get yesterday's decision overturned, so they get their injunction to prevent a sale.Leeds_Addick said:If we are sold in the meantime then what would be the point of an appeal?
That's what's confusing me
The court of appeal option (a different appeal) was laways going to be further down the line and less of a concern.
Anyway the judge has declined the appeal, so we now need TS to get the sale done, as there appears to be no legal reason to prevent it.0 -
Good for Football League World, their day in the sun.1
-
1
-
I think the Judge knows, he just does not want it to appear he knows.roseandcrown said:ForeverAddickted said:
Judge should ask him why he went with the opposite line yesterday if this is the casericky_otto said:
Because he is so arrogant that he thought it was in the bag.ForeverAddickted said:Why didnt Chaisty take this approach yesterday?
This. He is asking the judge to google but TS was in the country before yesterday.5 -
Mihail's statement on Football League World's website: “I imagine many of you will have seen pictures of Thomas Sandgaard at yesterday’s game and while I am sure you will appreciate we can’t go into detail, we can say that conversations with prospective buyers are progressing positively. I’d like to thank the staff directly involved, who are working tirelessly to provide information to support these ongoing discussions. There is still work to be done but yesterday’s decision allows us to focus on moving the club forward and putting these difficult times behind us.”
0 -
Oh this is getting quite amusing0
-
I was struggling yesterday with why damages were not considered to be adequate remedy. Both ESI 1 & 2 are clearly only in it for (Sandgaard's) money.
So letting ESI 1 sell to TS and the crooks fight each other for the proceeds afterwards would seem an entirely reasonable course of action.4 -
……...nothing (for once) from him to trip us up, I reckon re imminent timescalesmeldrew66 said:Mihail's statement on Football League World's website: “I imagine many of you will have seen pictures of Thomas Sandgaard at yesterday’s game and while I am sure you will appreciate we can’t go into detail, we can say that conversations with prospective buyers are progressing positively. I’d like to thank the staff directly involved, who are working tirelessly to provide information to support these ongoing discussions. There is still work to be done but yesterday’s decision allows us to focus on moving the club forward and putting these difficult times behind us.”
0 -
Pearce saying there is a difference in a short-term injunction rather than a three-month one. Which is kind of obvious.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
.4
-
"still work to be done"
Not close, pure speculation1 -
Judge believes he has the power to make an injunction pending an intervention by the court of appeal.
1 -
Be honest, how many of you had to google "Pyrrhic". I know I did.ForeverAddickted said:Trial will be a Pyrrhic victory for Lex Dominus even if they win, says Chaisty. Therefore court of appeal should consider balance of convenience.1 -
Is LK not speaking?0
-
Are we fucked here...??0
-
This is similar chat to what the Judge came out with before passing judgement last nightNorthheathAddick said:Are we fucked here...??1 -
Chaisty: Have you seen the story in Football League World?
Judge Pearce: Yes. Leeds are after Reading's Michael Olise.39 -
Judge Pearce tends to state the obvious before passing judgement so everyone is fully aware of what he means0
-
No, I don't think so. 'Pure speculation' by Chaisty that the sale to TS is 'imminent'.NorthheathAddick said:Are we fucked here...??
0 - Sponsored links:
-
I guess they would argue (a) they have no control over the sale price (b) Panorama could just be wound up immediately after the dealIdleHans said:I was struggling yesterday with why damages were not considered to be adequate remedy. Both ESI 1 & 2 are clearly only in it for (Sandgaard's) money.
So letting ESI 1 sell to TS and the crooks fight each other for the proceeds afterwards would seem an entirely reasonable course of action.0 -
I have absolutely no idea what that means .ForeverAddickted said:Judge believes he has the power to make an injunction pending an intervention by the court of appeal.1 -
Yeah as it goes it was wasn’t it...but this is doing untold damage to my nerves here...ForeverAddickted said:
This is similar chat to what the Judge came out with before passing judgement last nightNorthheathAddick said:Are we fucked here...??2 -
Well, this is marginally more stressful than I thought today would be
5 -
Kreamer raising the fact that Chaisty's point of law (in which he is seeking a short-term injunction) relates to a Family Court - she is saying it is in relation to a change of situation to children.
Kreamer says Chaisty is seeking to rely on a decision in the family court which is about an arrangement for a child. Is about welfare of the child and not an appropriate precedent.
10 -
He'd make a good football punditForeverAddickted said:Judge Pearce tends to state the obvious before passing judgement so everyone is fully aware of what he means1 -
-
Who was it that mentioned VAR yesterday...😬😬😬0
-
Short term injunction while they try to get permission to appeal from Court of AppealBedsaddick said:
I have absolutely no idea what that means .ForeverAddickted said:Judge believes he has the power to make an injunction pending an intervention by the court of appeal.0 -
Kreamer taking the piss out of Chaisty again!!6
This discussion has been closed.
