What happens next when Sisu appeal? (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
The case would also be breaking new ground legally, as potentially the first appeal of its kind to be heard in the whole of Europe.
Click to expand...

First time someone's appealed or first time it's been allowed to be heard?

If for no other reason than I can't take another few months of this, I hope it's rejected.

Everyone hold your breath for "3 weeks" then.
 
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
FFs really am sick of this off the field shit now enough is enough, there could be another 7 months of this shit :(:(:(:(:(:(
 
M

Monners

Well-Known Member
The first Appeal of this type ever in the whole of Europe? Makes one chuckle at the absurdity of it all really!
 
sky blue john

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
So seems very unlikely but obviously they will try.
Are Sisu open to damages claims from CCC / Acl on top of costs ?
I hope CCFC are not going to bear the brunt of these costs !
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
According to Tony they will not appeal - they are out of funds and the investors are up in arms.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
N

njdlawyer

New Member
The process as outlined is the route that SISU must now follow if they do, indeed, intend to appeal

An appeal cannot just be based upon a general dissatisfaction over the outcome. The appellant must show that the original tribunal made a fundamental error in law leading to an incorrect outcome or that there was information / evidence that was not considered by the court and which was not known to the parties at the time of the original hearing ie new evidence

You can tell by how long it has taken to get this far that it will continue to be a protracted process

Any lawyer instructed in any case of any sort has a professional duty to pursue an appeal only in circumstances in which he / she believes that there is an arguable case
 
jimmyhillsfanclub

jimmyhillsfanclub

Well-Known Member
"What happens next when Sisu appeal?"

I'll tell ya......CCFC lose even more long-standing long suffering fans & probably blow the last chance to inspire the potential new generation of supporters.....that's what.

Utter utter thunder c*nts..... the lot of 'em!
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
I would add it is my understanding that even if the appeal is refused the Court of Appeal as a matter of law must refer points of European law that are not acte clair (ie transparent and straight forward) to the Court of Justice of the European Union
 
S

SimonGilbert

Telegraph Tea Boy
oldskyblue58 said:
I would add it is my understanding that even if the appeal is refused the Court of Appeal as a matter of law must refer points of European law that are not acte clair (ie transparent and straight forward) to the Court of Justice of the European Union
Click to expand...

Maybe so. But I would be surprised if points of European law is what is under scrutiny.

The judge said the law in this particular area was "quite clear"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Maybe so. But I would be surprised if points of European law is what is under scrutiny.

The judge said the law in this particular area was "quite clear"



wouldn't the basis of their appeal be that this was state aid under European Law though and that because the private investors argument has never been brought before in the UK that the details are not clear and need Court of Justice of the European Union scrutiny? It may still be thrown out but you can bet they will be prepared to throw more money at legals having come this far

Not saying they (SISU) are right, personally I think the latest judgement was clear and straight forward - the facts he has made clear pretty much confirm much of what I have been saying for months. However in my opinion the object of SISU court action is not always about having a good case.

All I am saying is just because the Court of Appeal reject it does not necessarily mean the legal action ceases
 
Last edited:
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
Maybe so. But I would be surprised if points of European law is what is under scrutiny.

The judge said the law in this particular area was "quite clear"



wouldn't the basis of their appeal be that this was state aid under European Law though and that because the private investors argument has never been brought before in the UK that the details are not clear and need Court of Justice of the European Union scrutiny? It may still be thrown out but you can bet they will be prepared to throw more money at legals having come this far

Not saying they (SISU) are right, personally I think the latest judgement was clear and straight forward - the facts he has made clear pretty much confirm much of what I have been saying for months. However in my opinion the object of SISU court action is not always about having a good case.
Click to expand...

The judge was extremely clear in his ruling, however he build his decision on two things:
1) The fact that the council already owns 50% of ACL so the loan can be seen as protection of their investment. On that basis he said it was not state aid. This could be seen as a national court protecting a national council, and may not be what the state aid legislation was intended for by the EU commission.
2) The rent strike was aimed at distressing ACL. While this is true it may not be illegal in itself and it can be argued it cannot be the foundation of deciding if state aid is unlawful or not.

I think Sisu's only chance of getting the judgement overturned is to get the case to the EU commission and looked at by 'European' rather than 'British' eyes.

So my question is - when they have exhausted all national options, can they bring it to the commission in Bruxelles or the EU court of Justice in Luxembourg?
 
S

Spionkop

New Member
Sisu's rent strike was not illegal? That's a new and interesting concept.
Try telling that to any people who don't pay their rent/mortgage.
 
sky blue john

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
Spionkop said:
Sisu's rent strike was not illegal? That's a new and interesting concept.
Try telling that to any people who don't pay their rent/mortgage.
Click to expand...

How about putting your company into administration with the sole purposes of breaking a 40 year lease ?
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
The judge was extremely clear in his ruling, however he build his decision on two things:
1) The fact that the council already owns 50% of ACL so the loan can be seen as protection of their investment. On that basis he said it was not state aid. This could be seen as a national court protecting a national council, and may not be what the state aid legislation was intended for by the EU commission.
2) The rent strike was aimed at distressing ACL. While this is true it may not be illegal in itself and it can be argued it cannot be the foundation of deciding if state aid is unlawful or not.

I think Sisu's only chance of getting the judgement overturned is to get the case to the EU commission and looked at by 'European' rather than 'British' eyes.

So my question is - when they have exhausted all national options, can they bring it to the commission in Bruxelles or the EU court of Justice in Luxembourg?
Click to expand...

When I suggested they should have took it to the European Commission in the first place were you one of the posters telling me i was talking rubbish?
 
Jim

Jim

Well-Known Member
The first stage in the process requires Sisu to apply to Mr Justice Hickinbottom - as the judge in the recent proceedings - for leave to appeal, usually within seven days.
That process will require Sisu’s legal team to outline which elements of the judgment they take issue with and the legal basis for their argument
Click to expand...

This step in the process would seem to be the issue to keep an eye on. Hickinbottom was very scathing of SISU throughout the judgement and set out quite clearly his reasoning. I would be very surprised if SISU can find anything that Hickinbottom will have to conceed on. I suspect this part of the process could be out of the way very swiftly and hopefully retaining the original decision.


To paraphrase Hickinbottoms hopeful reply..... "pfffft!".
 
C

Chipfat

Well-Known Member
Under the current owners, i don't think the club has got years... if the FL step in and tell them to pay ACL as agreed and the judge tells them to pay the court cost's it could be a real breaking point..
 
joemercersaces

joemercersaces

Well-Known Member
Pissing in the wind. Judges always have one eye on the possibility of appeal before delivering their initial judgement. There never was a case here and the only surprise was that the second judge involved allowed it to go to a hearing. I expect J Hickinbottom may have something to say to Timmy about his incredibly arrogant remarks post judgement, remarks that sailed perilously close to contempt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top