Rob S wrote:
"This could actually be a good thing (or at least contain some good things). Hear me out...
A lot of the back & forth about who said & did what in whatever negotiation/meeting/downstairs toilet has never really come out properly in public. These actions (sue & counter-sue), if they end up in court*, will mean that what happened with the ACL/Higgs/CCC/Sisu rent deal that got called off will be discussed in open court where every single protagonist will be legally bound to tell the truth, the whole truth etc."
In my opinion, that's unfortunately not always what happens in court. Sometimes, in court witnesses have distorted recollection of such meetings. For example in 2005, a High Court judge stated:
"Ms Seppala was the least satisfactory of all the witnesses. In making my general comments above, I said that no-one was deliberately lying. But I fear Ms Seppala has a distorted recollection of some events – particularly about what happened at the meetings in New York in January 2005 – and, with the benefit of hindsight, has introduced a "spin" (I am sorry not to be able to find a better word) which suits the Applicants' case. She is also prone to exaggerate – the Respondents would characterise it as lying, but I give her the benefit of the doubt on that.................
