Court Case Thread! June 2018 (14 Viewers)

[wince]

Charity Commission legislation is quite clear regarding investment and it is the duty of the trustees to seek a maximum return, If Sisu's offer was more in financial terms than Wasps they have arguably failed their duties as trustees of registered charity, a preference over who they deal with does not come into it.

That's the point though ARGUABLY, charity commission or not they wouldn't sell to highest bidder if it would bring the charity in disrepute ,that's another argument Like the Judge says deal with the point at hand first , anyway not going to get into a debate about it , got to get out of here before F/P has a pop at me for not posting enough or on the wrong threads

 

---

[Astute]

Surely they just say "Here's the valuation KPMG gave us, here's what Wasps paid" ?

But the question is back onto state aid like it was before. So they have to argue about the case involving state aid like previously.

 

[Nick]

But the question is back onto state aid like it was before. So they have to argue about the case involving state aid like previously.

Yeah but if they are moaning about the value, they just whip out the document from KPMG and if it's under valued it's their fault. They might have already and I've missed it?

 

[Astute]

That's the point though ARGUABLY, charity commission or not they wouldn't sell to highest bidder if it would bring the charity in disrepute ,that's another argument Like the Judge says deal with the point at hand first , anyway not going to get into a debate about it , got to get out of here before F/P has a pop at me for not posting enough or on the wrong threads

But how long had they tried to sell to SISU? They agreed on deals just for SISU to pull out. Then they would come in with an even lower bid.

 

[Nick]

Which I guess is the stuff OSB has said before that's referred to?

 

[Astute]

Yeah but if they are moaning about the value, they just whip out the document from KPMG and if it's under valued it's their fault. They might have already and I've missed it?

Not got a clue. But they seem to want to mention that it wasn't state aid each time. And wouldn't the judges already have seen the paperwork from it?

 

[Astute]

Which I guess is the stuff OSB has said before that's referred to?

And not just OSB.

 

[Nick]

Not got a clue. But they seem to want to mention that it wasn't state aid each time. And wouldn't the judges already have seen the paperwork from it?

You would have thought that it would be simple enough for the judge to just say "this is what expert valuers have said, this is what it sold for".

 

[Nick]

Hadn't everything already been agreed before they had even bidded on the Higgs half?

 

[Warwickhunt]

still cannot argue with the fact that the council did not get the best deal possible to get more coffers into the tax payers bag! im not bothered about all this SISU stuff really the council have a duty of care to make sure that they get the best financial return for OUR PROPERTY!!

 

[Astute]

You would have thought that it would be simple enough for the judge to just say "this is what expert valuers have said, this is what it sold for".

But it isn't for the judge to argue the case. It is up to the judges to decide on the evidence they see and hear.

 

[Nick]

All this mention of Higgs is bringing me out in a sweat, can see some long lost Higgs cousin coming on giving it threats.

 

[Nick]

But it isn't for the judge to argue the case. It is up to the judges to decide on the evidence they see and hear.

That's isn't the judge arguing the case, just saying "give me the valuation you had", "give me the deal documents" and comparing, surely?

 

[Nick]

The witness statements from him and Joy seem a bit pointless.

Hope he is checking that the evidence hasn't been Photoshopped

 

[Astute]

still cannot argue with the fact that the council did not get the best deal possible to get more coffers into the tax payers bag! im not bothered about all this SISU stuff really the council have a duty of care to make sure that they get the best financial return for OUR PROPERTY!!

I agree. But that isn't what this case is about. You have to look at what is being said and evidence provided only. Having the arena built for CCFC doesn't even come into it. Or even the money our club lost putting towards the build costs.

 

[Astute]

That's isn't the judge arguing the case, just saying "give me the valuation you had", "give me the deal documents" and comparing, surely?

What makes you think that the judges haven't already seen it?

 

[Nick]

What makes you think that the judges haven't already seen it?

I have no idea if they have.

Do all documents get released to the public at the end if they are used in court? Im sure last time they posted up loads of the "evidence" used.

 

[Nick]

 

[Nick]

Higgs charity "ruggedly autonomous"
Wasps QC is now speaking.

She says the Higgs charity was “ruggedly autonomous” in regards to the sale and “certainly was not going to do what was convenient to others”.

She said it was not right to understand the transactions - those of the sale of the stadium and the lease extension - as linked.

She said Sisu’s QC Mr Thompson yesterday suggested that “the council could have purchased shares not telling the charity what it was going to do...the charity could have put an embarrassment clause in the contract and prevented the sale to the claimants”.

Surely the fact that both the sale and the lease extension were discussed and agreed at the same time in the same council meeting shows they are linked?

 

[Astute]

Surely the fact that both the sale and the lease extension were discussed and agreed at the same time in the same council meeting shows they are linked?

Of course they are linked. Are they saying that they are not?

 

[Nick]

Of course they are linked. Are they saying that they are not?

Unless it is worded wrong

She said it was not right to understand the transactions - those of the sale of the stadium and the lease extension - as linked.

 

[Astute]

I have no idea if they have.

Do all documents get released to the public at the end if they are used in court? Im sure last time they posted up loads of the "evidence" used.

SISU have previously used court to find out information that they could use in court for future cases before.

 

[Astute]

Unless it is worded wrong

No idea. But I am not too much of an idiot. I know they were linked. But how much and when is a different matter to be solved.

 

[Nick]

Risk of collapse
Wasps QC says the collapse of her client would affect the wider community and other parties.

She said it “creates ripples”.

Lord Justice Irwin says they could not possibly make a ruling based on whether third parties would be disadvantaged.

Lord Justice Leveson said if the bullet was dodged today “the bullet is only going to come and potentially shoot you in future”.

 

[Nick]

 

[Nick]

Clarification
Lord Justice Leveson is seeking clarification on a submission by Wasps QC that Strutt and Parker set out aspects of the case separately rather than together - looking at the stadium and hotel separately.

He says he does not understand the point she is making and she admits she does not either.

Mr Goudie for the council then tries to explain that KPMG take into account more costs than Strutt and Parker and therefore there is a difference in the valuations.

There are still confused looks in the court.

The QC admits she doesn't know the point she is making? :emoji_hushed:

Live: Day two of Ricoh Arena row in Court of Appeal

 

[jordan210]

Interesting last sentence by the judge not put on Twitter by Gilbert

Wasps QC says the collapse of her client would affect the wider community and other parties.

She said it “creates ripples”.

Lord Justice Irwin says they could not possibly make a ruling based on whether third parties would be disadvantaged.

Lord Justice Leveson said if the bullet was dodged today “the bullet is only going to come and potentially shoot you in future”.

 

[Nick]

Back onto the PR battle stuff



While it is pretty damning and doesnt make them look very good, not sure what that proves?

 

[Liquid Gold]

Won't somebody think of Italia's car park!

 

[Nick]

Interesting last sentence by the judge not put on Twitter by Gilbert

Wasps QC says the collapse of her client would affect the wider community and other parties.

She said it “creates ripples”.

Lord Justice Irwin says they could not possibly make a ruling based on whether third parties would be disadvantaged.

Lord Justice Leveson said if the bullet was dodged today “the bullet is only going to come and potentially shoot you in future”.

I did wonder what the bullet comment was about?

 

[ccfcway]

"He says he does not understand the point she is making and she admits she does not either."

we should encourage them two to post on here, they would blend in just fine

 

[Captain Dart]

So I guess SISU will appeal and this will be going to the Supreme Court in January next year I guess.

 

[jordan210]

I did wonder what the bullet comment was about?

I read that as he has picked up on something. No idea what but doesn't sound good for wasps.

 

[tisza]

wasps QC surely being ironic about impact on future of Wasps and related companies. Hard to see what real consideration was given to future of CCFC by CCC, Higgs or Wasps apart from a desperate hope that their actions would bring about a change of ownership.

 

[Nick]