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
-
Essentially yes. He may be in his Jim jams though.WSS said:So nobody gets to speak in the next seven days? Evidence and ruling just gets passed to another judge to make a decision in their pants?0 -
Has PE even launched an appeal?0
-
Cafc43v3r said:
I'll think your find it does, it was in Boris's "oven ready" Brexit deal, that no one including the cabinet bothered reading.kentred2 said:
Nothing to do with the EU and hence brexitSix-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Surely ECHR has no jurisdiction here post Brexit?WattsTheMatter said:
This will still be the UK Supreme Court. With the exception of Human Rights and the associated ECHR, the SC is the highest court in Britain.Cafc43v3r said:
What about the ECJ or its replacement?cafcfan said:
Nope. The Supreme Court replaced the House of Lords as the final arbiters in 2009.golfaddick said:
Yep, thought there was another strand to it all. Got an O level in Economic & Public Affairs 37 years ago but couldnt remember what was next after COA.Cafc43v3r said:
House of Lords, it won't get in front of the ECJ in time......LawrieAbrahams said:
The RCJ is the building where the Court of Appeal is based.golfaddick said:So, if I have this right.
PE wanted to stop the sale of the club so wants an injunction.
Injunction denied.
PE appeals that decision.
Appeal denied.
Appeals the appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Granted.
Why the feck not just go straight to the top in the first place.
I hasten to add I don't think the Court of Appeal is the furthest they can go. Royal Court of Justice ??
Sorry that was in answer to @golfaddick
Well I haven't read it either, so I can't comment on its contents, but the European Court of Human Rights isn't anything to do with the European Union. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is the supreme court of the European Union, and is unrelated to the European Court of Human Rights.
2 -
There was too much excitement last night before completion of case. Feels bit amateur...again. When will we learn to get excited at the right time.1
-
Thanks for the helpful insight.Jints said:
They get the judgement including refusal by the original judge for appeal, MM witness statement, any other relevant documentation, a skeleton argument from Lex as to why permission should be granted, a short statement from Panorama saying why it shouldn't.Redrobo said:I think the new Judge only gets the trial notes in these cases?There has not been a technical objection, so they are basically saying the judge got it wrong and hoping another judge agrees.
Good luck with that.
0 -
So if people are saying that the injunction will be extended if the COA grant permission to appeal then surely TS will be more inclined to pay them off. Seems too risky otherwise.0
-
Plus the more you get into this and work through the rational scenarios, it feels to me that as soon as Panorama is free to get shot of its shares it will do so and fast. It is less and less in Nimer's interests to be holding out for a higher price, bringing more parties to the table while legal risks remain in place.stonemuse said:
I don’t. It’s a week delay ... which is crap for so many reasons ... but it’s nearly done now.Rothko said:I fear the worst now
Arguably this is now playing out to work against both ESI versions 1 and 2. Just need TS not to mess around and get it done as soon as he is legally able to do so.
It is in both his and Panorama's interests to use the next week to have a deal ready to execute as soon as the current injunction is lifted, and to say nothing publicly in the interim.
Separately, I wonder whether LK will continue to represent Panorama after the conflict of interest (not a conflict of interest) issues were raised. I don't know whether Panorama is represented in the application to appeal hearing? One thing her involvement does do, is to settle my mind that this isn't some sort of elaborate grift between the two ESIs.4 -
Dont see why he'd bother doing that if he's gone to the hassle of sorting out his Holding Company on Companies House etc.Rothko said:
Or more likely walk awayTalal said:So if people are saying that the injunction will be extended if the COA grant permission to appeal then surely TS will be more inclined to pay them off. Seems too risky otherwise.5 -
Is there a chance TS will just pay off PE and buy the club before next week or is that not possible now?0
-
Sponsored links:
-
I wouldnt say that's more likely. If he doesn't want to pay them off he'd just wait until the COA verdict and hope it's rejected.Rothko said:
Or more likely walk awayTalal said:So if people are saying that the injunction will be extended if the COA grant permission to appeal then surely TS will be more inclined to pay them off. Seems too risky otherwise.1 -
Nimmer sort them out.0
-
The costs on due diligence and a holding company are significantly less then having to find a few million to pay a load of gangsters off.ForeverAddickted said:
Dont see why he'd bother doing that if he's gone to the hassle of sorting out his Holding Company on Companies House etc.Rothko said:
Or more likely walk awayTalal said:So if people are saying that the injunction will be extended if the COA grant permission to appeal then surely TS will be more inclined to pay them off. Seems too risky otherwise.
3 -
How do you think I feel? I've actually got to read all of them...i_b_b_o_r_g said:800+ new posts since this morning ffs12 -
If Nimer had never got involved with Elliott in the first place, we would never have had this mess.LargeAddick said:
Ridiculous. That is at the door of Elliott, Farnell, Southall and Nimer in no particular order.AdTheAddicK said:
With all fairness tho, Chaisty could be the sole reason why we no longer exist.WattsTheMatter said:Seriously, no point in anyone emailing Chaisty abuse or anything for that matter. All is does is assist Elliott and co casting our fanbase in a bad light.
He is a barrister. He is paid to represent clients. He doesn't necessarily have to agree with them, but it is his job to represent whether he agrees or not.0 -
Was it nimer or farnell who bought Elliott in? I get it would be nimers final saykillerandflash said:
If Nimer had never got involved with Elliott in the first place, we would never have had this mess.LargeAddick said:
Ridiculous. That is at the door of Elliott, Farnell, Southall and Nimer in no particular order.AdTheAddicK said:
With all fairness tho, Chaisty could be the sole reason why we no longer exist.WattsTheMatter said:Seriously, no point in anyone emailing Chaisty abuse or anything for that matter. All is does is assist Elliott and co casting our fanbase in a bad light.
He is a barrister. He is paid to represent clients. He doesn't necessarily have to agree with them, but it is his job to represent whether he agrees or not.0 -
TS will see this through.
I think today is just playing the game and giving them a "fair case" whilst knowing that it won't come about in the end. All bases covered and no follow on shit involving Charlton. Just Esi 1 & 2 to fight over the scraps whilst Charlton ride off into the sunset...
Take it easy guys...after everything we have been through...waiting an extra week for the inevitable conclusion is nothing.0 -
ForeverAddickted said:
Dont see why he'd bother doing that if he's gone to the hassle of sorting out his Holding Company on Companies House etc.Rothko said:
Or more likely walk awayTalal said:So if people are saying that the injunction will be extended if the COA grant permission to appeal then surely TS will be more inclined to pay them off. Seems too risky otherwise.
It costs £12 and takes about twenty minutes
2 -
This isn't going to happen is it. The 7 days will drag on and on, PE and Co. will do their best to ensure there is no immediate resolution, just like they have done today. Knew it was too good to be true, we all got our hopes up but the TS takeover is looking like the latest in a long line of false dawns.0
-
A reminder of what I posted yesterday. Sandgaard isn't just going to walk away just because of a minor holdup.killerandflash said:One like for my reply. From Thomas Sandgaard. He's not going anywhere
5 -
Sponsored links:
-
Atletico Addick said:
Chaisty is. Got to be unlikely for the judge to U-turn his own decision, we would hope!roseandcrown said:
who boring fucker or the judge?Atletico Addick said:He's asking for an appeal..
It depends. If the judge was in any doubts as to either the law on the situation, for example, he was setting a precedent, or it being a sort of 50-50 decision, he would probably grant an appeal so a higher up court could make a more informed decision.
0 -
Why would he want to? If he pays Elliott as a matter of choice, that's an extra expense for him. If he waits for the court to decide it may cost him nothing extra, at worst he'll have to do some re-negotiating.Covered_End_Lad said:Is there a chance TS will just pay off PE and buy the club before next week or is that not possible now?1 -
So you've got Elliott who is eager to take over a loss making football Club even though he ain't got a post to piss in, and the fans of which obviously detest him, and the powers-that-be don't smell a rat?
Open your eyes up ffs. Any genuine multi millionaire businessman missing out, as they did, on the chance to buy a white elephant that is an Engish football club would surely have walked away at the first hurdle and maybe looked at it as a bullet dodged. These c**** however appeal every decision that goes against them, whether it be the EFL or a court of law (basically every decision that've faced so far) and no one that matters, is asking why? Ffs21 -
This has the potential to be a major hold up though...killerandflash said:
A reminder of what I posted yesterday. Sandgaard isn't just going to walk away just because of a minor holdup.killerandflash said:One like for my reply. From Thomas Sandgaard. He's not going anywhere1 -
Nimer and Tommy need to announce tonight that a deal has been struck for the grand total of 1 pound.
Lets see how keen they are to carry on with their appeal if there's nothing in it for them.
8 -
Nimer didnt get involved with Elliott, Farnell did. Worse thing that happened was Nimer & Southall falling out. Nimer wanted revenge & Farnell got involved (on the basis he had previously been screwed by Southall ?)killerandflash said:
If Nimer had never got involved with Elliott in the first place, we would never have had this mess.LargeAddick said:
Ridiculous. That is at the door of Elliott, Farnell, Southall and Nimer in no particular order.AdTheAddicK said:
With all fairness tho, Chaisty could be the sole reason why we no longer exist.WattsTheMatter said:Seriously, no point in anyone emailing Chaisty abuse or anything for that matter. All is does is assist Elliott and co casting our fanbase in a bad light.
He is a barrister. He is paid to represent clients. He doesn't necessarily have to agree with them, but it is his job to represent whether he agrees or not.1 -
BrentfordAddick said:Would be good to know thoughts on who to lobby, what to do. It feels like the EFL would help us by saying that Lex Dominus or whatever can't be trusted to run a football club. Guidance from CAST etc welcome.Personally, I would be lobbying Mihail. He's always on about just trying to do what's best for the club, and now he can prove it. Instruct Lauren to inform the Court of Appeal that the proceeds of any sale will be lodged in an escrow account until such time as the trial at the end of November has been resolved. That demonstrates good faith on Nimer's part and moves the balance of risk away from LD, so there is no need for an injunction preventing the sale of the club until the trial. It's also a way for him to make up for him making a bit of a pig's ear of his evidence submission.Although whether he/Nimer would actually be willing to do it is another matter entirely...If they won't, is there any way that Sandgaard could attach himself to the case as a 3rd party, and request the court to make an order regardless of whether either party is in favour? Legal bods, any thoughts?
16 -
With genuine respect to everyone on here, I have zero confidence in the views that it will all be ok in the end, and zero confidence in the views that say we are screwed. I don't think anyone really has a scooby, especially me. It's going to be a tense couple of weeks, at the least.21
-
Too many get mixed up with the emotions of Charlton and a potential new owner's intentions.0
-
Or with this extra week, TS gets contract watertight with ESI (ready to sign asap) and receives OADT approval from EFL, and once the Court of Appeals denies this new appeal, TS is owner.Rufus is a dogs name said:This isn't going to happen is it. The 7 days will drag on and on, PE and Co. will do their best to ensure there is no immediate resolution, just like they have done today. Knew it was too good to be true, we all got our hopes up but the TS takeover is looking like the latest in a long line of false dawns.2
This discussion has been closed.
