Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
CCC did go behind Sisu's back to negotiate about the loan with YB whilst they were still supposed to be carrying out a two-pronged approach.
There is no evidence that Sisu were doing the same.
All in the JR, though maybe you can only read certain bits of it?
From the JR, you'll love this. It kind of disagrees with your view the Council were going behind SISU's back in some kind of immoral way.
the Council was fully entitled to engage in discussions with the Bank,
unilaterally and without informing SISU: in English law, there is no general duty to
conduct commercial negotiations in good faith, or to refrain from conducting
negotiations with more than one counterparty at the same time without disclosure.
The Heads of Terms did not impose any specific duty, e.g. as to exclusivity. They
made clear that there was no intention to create legal obligations. The Council was
here engaged in the commercial field, and (subject to its public duties) it was entitled
to act in the way that it considered was best in protecting its own commercial
interests, namely its share in ACL. If it considered that its commercial interests
would best be served by having discussions with the Bank without SISU being aware
of those discussions, or their content, the Council was fully entitled to have such
discussions. It owed no duty to SISU. Criticism of the Council’s actions is simply
misplaced; particularly given that its commercial interests had been placed in
jeopardy by SISU and its subsidiary, CCFC, failing to comply with its contractual
obligations towards ACL.
Not sure how this line of argument from you shows how you think SISU's offer for Higgs share was better than Wasps, I guess you've given up on that.