Search results

FUCK!

Are you saying Gray's coming back too? :o

I agree - he always looked lightweight and was often too easily out-muscled off the ball. Shame because he had great feet.

Well he certainly wouldn't be the first to run a few bogus agents for extra cash. It's significant that he defected to live in the US.

Or when an election is coming up.

Firstly, he was in the Army Intelligence Corps. Secondly, when you look at the information that was alleged to have been passed to the Czechs, the most important reports turned out eventually to be false. Go figure.

It's just a guess, but are the former players initials PNT?

He was probably informed 'off the record' prior to Gilbert's revelation yes. Gilbert making it public allowed Eastwood to respond publicly by walking away from the talks.

According to CCC, Sisu made a slightly higher offer, but it was conditional. The insects offer was unconditional and was accepted.

My point was that, regardless of the legalities, Sisu took a huge risk by not complying with the spirit of the agreement. Essentially, they had already taken an action in February, which might possibly result in further legal action of some sort. They must've known that Eastwood would very...

I maybe wrong, but I think that would only be considered a breach of EU law, if it was also offered at significantly less than the market price.

It's possible that they thought they'd complied, but that very much depends on the wording of the agreement. In any event I'd argue that not informing the insects of the complaint to the EC at the outset, was a breach of the spirit of the agreement. And whether that's right or not, it's was...

I think that Sisu thought the agreement would be completed before the EC acted - hence the time pressure which they attempted to apply at the outset of the talks with the insects. If so, they clearly made an error of judgement. It's fair to assume that the EC would have requested information...

My understanding is that, once the EC have decided to investigate the complaint, it can be withdrawn, but the EC may decide to continue with their investigation.

Once the EC decided to make formal investigation, they would have been obliged to inform CCC. But, if the complaint was lodged towards the end of Feb., this decision was probably only made fairly recently.,

Well that is possible, because the EC may have only recently decided to investigate the complaint. CCC may not have found out about it until they were notified of the EC intention to open an investigation..

Exactly!

The headline is very misleading, so let's get this straight. It's the insects that have blocked further talks. Presumably because Sisu made a complaint to the EC that the CCC broke the EU rules when selling the Ricoh to the insects. The point is that Sisu have not made a complaint to the EC...

Sisu have made a complaint to the EC, so firstly, the EC will decide if they think the complaint warrants investigation. If it is, the EC will conduct the investigation and also decide what remedial action is required, if appropriate. The EC will keep the complainant (Sisu), informed of progress...

BUT - if their complaint against a UK council was upheld by the EU and the sale to the insects broke EU law, it could result in Sisu having a very strong case to sue the council AND potentially the insects for compensation in the UK courts.