Ricoh Arena to sue Northampton Town FC (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter CovFan
- Start date
BrisbaneBronco
Well-Known Member
Correct and that contract cannot be broken unless CCFC Limited is liquidated or unless ACL agree to it being broken. At the time of the ground share deal Limited were and still are in admin.
mattylad
Member
Least you can have a pint while watching the game lol
Last edited:
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Reckon so.
If I understand it correctly, acceptance of the CVA would involve the acceptance of a small sum for the termination of the lease.
If they were going to accept termination of the lease, I'd assume that they wouldn't be taking this action against Northampton.
So, if all of that is true, I'd say that it looks like the CVA is going to be rejected.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Jeez, that is desperate.
I'd rather go naked to the Pride Festival than go to watch rugby. It's rubbish.
I'd rather go naked to the Pride Festival than go to watch rugby. It's rubbish.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I would never want to see another club bankrupted because of us or our owners.
Yes, that's how I've felt for quite a while; abandon sisu, start again, free from all of this!
concur ,its a marker.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I also see that BCFC Trust want to ballot their members on boycotting the game at Sixfields.
I coudn't agree more!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Really? Wow so what you are saying is that even though the removal of the club would actually yield better dividends and profits as the gold mine is released the shareholder have to sue ACL? I didn't know that.
Are the shareholders thousands of different investors? Are the dividends likely to go down? What have the dividends been like up to now?
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
I get what you mean Hill, I have a lot of good mates who want me to go to Exeter City games next season, but I couldn't do it, although seeing this whole sorry saga makes me feel like shit.
This Is an Interesting little Sentence.
The issue is further clouded by the fact that Coventry City remain in administration, leading to the possibility of a potential change of ownership.
Astute
Well-Known Member
I see it as a good move by ACL.
NTFC can't afford this to go to court. The odds are they will look at the whole picture and pull out of the agreement. With only 3 weeks to go to the start of the season SISU won't have time to sort out another ground. ...even if another club would risk it. Does anyone find it strange that this comes the day after the Hoff offer?
How can SISU now say that ACL don't want us playing there? The FL will have to change their minds now
NTFC can't afford this to go to court. The odds are they will look at the whole picture and pull out of the agreement. With only 3 weeks to go to the start of the season SISU won't have time to sort out another ground. ...even if another club would risk it. Does anyone find it strange that this comes the day after the Hoff offer?
How can SISU now say that ACL don't want us playing there? The FL will have to change their minds now
duffer
Well-Known Member
For what it's worth, I think this court action might be on the grounds of "tortious interference".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
In essence, ACL has a contract with CCFC Ltd to play at the arena. NTFC are aware of that contract but interfere and CCFC Ltd break the contract. ACL then have a claim against NTFC for damages as the result of the breach of contract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
In essence, ACL has a contract with CCFC Ltd to play at the arena. NTFC are aware of that contract but interfere and CCFC Ltd break the contract. ACL then have a claim against NTFC for damages as the result of the breach of contract.
T
true sky blue
Guest
i work in law, got to say - sorry guys but this litigation stands no chance. Northampton have not stolen the Ricohs client. the contract was breached by the admission of the Ricoh hence the administration application they made. theyre not going to convince a judge after that they had no intention of removing sisu from the contract. Sisu had already breached the lease, the owners correct course of action is against sisu, now they can not do that they are desperately seeking compensation from other sources, Northampton have done nothing wrong at all. there is nothing to stop a business running from as many diferent premises as they want. Nothing in the lease would have tied ccfc owners to the ricoh other than monies owed, any business under commercial law can walk away and breach the terms of the lease, open their venture up at another premises, do you think the landlord could sue the new landlord? no they claim against the tenant for breach. this is a non starter it will be struck out
Last edited by a moderator:
James Smith
Well-Known Member
No that's not what I'm saying, you're saying that the loss of the lease in Ltd would yield better dividends which as far as I am aware haven't ever been paid to ACL shareholders.
If you have a contract you are expected to honour (and there's a word I don't often use in the same paragraph as SISU) that contract. If someone comes along and poaches the person/company that you have a contract, with you are entitled to be annoyed. You may also have recourse to legal options depending on the conditions of the contract. If the directors of a business don't persue money that is owed to a business especially (but not limited to) if it is a large amount then yes the shareholders can take action against the directors of a business. They are not meeting their fiduciary duty to the business.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiduciary#Duty_in_different_jurisdictions
I'mARealWizard
New Member
Sorry. But you talk utter bs.
Your recent postings are evidence that your claims are pie in the sky.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
ACL must think it worth pursuing otherwise they wouldn't threaten.
Astute
Well-Known Member
The closest you will ever get to being in law is being a mother in law
I'mARealWizard
New Member
Danceswithhorses
Well-Known Member
My arse do you
Law..n mowers maybe :facepalm:
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
Or "The Legend of Cardoza's Gold". Possibly an 80's Spectrum computer game. Definitely a platform game I reckon.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
the legal chap speaking on behalf of ACL seemed to imply there was an argument to be had that the lease is tied to the golden share and even if SISU liquidate ltd with the lease in it ACL have a claim that it's still valid.
Cardoza might regret publicly saying SISU could afford ot pay the rent but chose not to. that comment alone will prevent him pleading ignorance of the situation.
Cardoza might regret publicly saying SISU could afford ot pay the rent but chose not to. that comment alone will prevent him pleading ignorance of the situation.
T
true sky blue
Guest
haha i do though and i can assure you this action which is not litigation at all its pre action notice to Northampton will go nowhere at all. 100%
T
true sky blue
Guest
if that was right ACL would be co -owners of the club .. which they are not. they are simply commercial property landlords. nothing more
Cobblers36
New Member
North_East_Cobbler
New Member
Waloc!
Careful what you wish for. . . . without a ground to play at, what happens next?
NTFC have done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law, and won't stand by and be threatened with legal action that has no basis in reality. The Football League are the ones in the wrong for ratifying this in the first place, but to sue NTFC for offering a place to play is, frankly, ridiculous.
CCFC supporters, you want to stop trying to bully NTFC, their supporters, and chairman, and concentrate on taking it up with the Football League. THEY are the ones who agreed to this shambolic arrangement, THEY are the ones who gave the go ahead to allow Coventry to play outside of Coventry. If NTFC renege on their agreement (which our chairman won't do) then CCFC have no place to play, can't fulfil their fixtures, and should be expelled from the competition. :wave:
Careful what you wish for. . . . without a ground to play at, what happens next?
NTFC have done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law, and won't stand by and be threatened with legal action that has no basis in reality. The Football League are the ones in the wrong for ratifying this in the first place, but to sue NTFC for offering a place to play is, frankly, ridiculous.
CCFC supporters, you want to stop trying to bully NTFC, their supporters, and chairman, and concentrate on taking it up with the Football League. THEY are the ones who agreed to this shambolic arrangement, THEY are the ones who gave the go ahead to allow Coventry to play outside of Coventry. If NTFC renege on their agreement (which our chairman won't do) then CCFC have no place to play, can't fulfil their fixtures, and should be expelled from the competition. :wave: