Higgs v SISU Court Document (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bennets Afro
- Start date
blueflint
Well-Known Member
Astute
Well-Known Member
Because of the way they have dealt with our club the trust has gone. Who would trust them to give anything over that might go against them. I wouldn't.
When did that guy from ACL jump ship to YB ,I bet It relates to this period.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
You could say that from either side though. I was just generally asking how it works in these cases, if it relies on "honesty" to send over everything, then we are screwed surely?
Bennets Afro
Well-Known Member
oops. I moved it within dropbox. I have put back in its original place now
hill83
Well-Known Member
I've saved the other 3 just in case.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Was getting all paranoid we'd been SISU'd/ACL'd there (delete boogeyman of choice)
hill83
Well-Known Member
Damn it! I was about to fire Dongo up to get the conspiracy underway.
steveo1987
Well-Known Member
Its back on again . Just downloaded it
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
MR JUSTICE LEGGATT: These days, the usual approach is not, as it once was, to treat the counterclaim and the claim independently; it's to look overall at who the winner is and it seems to me that this is a case which has effectively ended as a nil-all draw, if I'm allowed to use the comparison.
MR BRENNAN: I think minus one each probably more accurately sums it up.
MR BRENNAN: I think minus one each probably more accurately sums it up.
Just read it.
Sisu wanted to buy the debt, Higgs share, and councils power of veto.
Something made Higgs/acl/CCC twitchy (maybe figured out true intentions of sisu?) so council bought out mortgage instead, which prevented sisu taking over acl.
This pissed them off beyond all recognition.
Hence the legal actions.
The transfer of player registrations and structuring of companies and dangling of carrots/bait (CCFC will be liquidated) led acl to go after the rent that was withheld despite what they say, but sisu trumped them with their own admin.
In fairness acl/CCC were only people in a position to fight sisu or even try and get new owners for CCFC. (125 yr lease would mean sisu owning Ricoh forever and CCFC never owning it ...you can see why council don't want to let it go to them.)
Unfortunately it has up to now failed...perhaps JR result will be the holy grail?
Sisu wanted to buy the debt, Higgs share, and councils power of veto.
Something made Higgs/acl/CCC twitchy (maybe figured out true intentions of sisu?) so council bought out mortgage instead, which prevented sisu taking over acl.
This pissed them off beyond all recognition.
Hence the legal actions.
The transfer of player registrations and structuring of companies and dangling of carrots/bait (CCFC will be liquidated) led acl to go after the rent that was withheld despite what they say, but sisu trumped them with their own admin.
In fairness acl/CCC were only people in a position to fight sisu or even try and get new owners for CCFC. (125 yr lease would mean sisu owning Ricoh forever and CCFC never owning it ...you can see why council don't want to let it go to them.)
Unfortunately it has up to now failed...perhaps JR result will be the holy grail?
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
No one should ever be allowed to use the phrase 'nil-all draw'.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
If you don't think they affect you personally adversely why take the risk (may have been the logic)
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I had typed it and was hovering over send
TurkeyTrot
New Member
Oddly enough I was with my solicitor today and made the very same point when he said that that is what he would be requesting. He made a good point saying that all it takes is a leap to something that there was no trail to (maybe an answer to a question that there was no trail to it being asked for example) and the digging really starts, and most e mails end up being replied to and forwarded so there will generally be a good trail between a number of parties and if an individual does try and deliberately hold something back from a judge then they will be hung out to dry. In short it ain't worth it.
Nick
Administrator
I'm by no means saying anything has been withheld, just didn't know if it relied on honesty
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yeah, and then it's a surefire route to lose a case that you might otherwise win anyway, even if you do hand over things that don't show you in the best light at times/
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I think the emails are legit. I think there is a paragraph in there about the all the other emails. Which SISU have also seen. They have highlighted three or four.
I assume the council have all the rest so the contexts of the conversations will or can be revealed.
These to me are everyday conversations behind the scenes can you imagine the ones SISU have been having.
The one about SISU having to pay is the Higgs is it not (who are not facing the JR)
So basically the council are hoping SISU will still agree a rent deal. At the same time they are deciding if they should approach YB.
They agree with ACL that they should.
Is there a legal requirement that they should inform SISU, no.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
I will be very interested in hearing / seeing a response to the "rent holiday" as according to that document everybody knew it was coming and agreed / understood the reasoning behind it..... Which was certainly not the impression given to us through various articles in the Telegraph.
Nick
Administrator
I agree it doesn't say much about that, could it have been agreed?
About the rent strike:
On 6 March 2012 a meeting took place between Mr Fisher (on behalf of
the Club), Ms Deering (on behalf of SCL), Mr West and Ms Commane
(on behalf of the Council) and Messrs Harris and Knatchbull-Hugessen
(on behalf of AEHC). A note of the meeting is at [TB/F/2]. This
meeting followed on from the meetings held in the week of 27 February
2012. A further road map was advanced, which envisaged the parties
negotiating together vis-à-vis the Bank for a “large discount” off the YB
Loan. The parties also discussed the importance of a ‘rent holiday’ for
the Club and the use of the funds in an escrow account as a means of
paying rent due to ACL from the Club. No objections were raised by the
Council or Charity to this course of action; indeed, the parties
understood the rationale for this approach.
On 6 March 2012 a meeting took place between Mr Fisher (on behalf of
the Club), Ms Deering (on behalf of SCL), Mr West and Ms Commane
(on behalf of the Council) and Messrs Harris and Knatchbull-Hugessen
(on behalf of AEHC). A note of the meeting is at [TB/F/2]. This
meeting followed on from the meetings held in the week of 27 February
2012. A further road map was advanced, which envisaged the parties
negotiating together vis-à-vis the Bank for a “large discount” off the YB
Loan. The parties also discussed the importance of a ‘rent holiday’ for
the Club and the use of the funds in an escrow account as a means of
paying rent due to ACL from the Club. No objections were raised by the
Council or Charity to this course of action; indeed, the parties
understood the rationale for this approach.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
My brain is definitely hurting and I still have not started on the court transcripts, but there are a few issues vexing me.
1) Why did the council negotiate with YB, all we've seen so far is the decisions taken but nothing of the process that led to those decisions being taken.
What threat to their interests was identified? It seems to me it was a reaction to threats of liquidation.
1a) These quotes are attributed to Martin Reeves from the August report
"I have been giving significant thought over the last few days to an alternative way forward to that that I was pushing with SISU last week – the details of this will come as no surprise to any of you as I have put it together during a number of discussions."
My proposal and its key features are as follows: "CCC should unilaterally buy out the loan and then refinance the YB loan to ACL, but with the support and agreement of Higgs as our partner..."
Doesn't that imply that SISU were made aware of the intention for CCC to buy out the loan and refinance?
2) Why did the £6M or so SISU expected to pay for the debt eventually become £14M that CCC paid.
Was YB in contact with SISU and CCC and playing one of against the other?
3) What was Daniel Gidneys involvement at YB, he left post as Chief Executive at ACL to go to YB in Oct 2012.
4) The agreement to purchase AEHC shares was not by CCFC, but "SISU or another SISU Group Company (“SISU”) will purchase the 50% interest in ACL".
What would that mean for the club, it certainly seems like they would not own the Arena, even if they became entitled to low rent and matchday revenue streams.
Seems to me like ARVO or similar would have ended up owing the Arena.
Finally as Dal points out this document is a "SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT AND THIRD PARTIES" ie it is only the evidence put forward by
1) Why did the council negotiate with YB, all we've seen so far is the decisions taken but nothing of the process that led to those decisions being taken.
What threat to their interests was identified? It seems to me it was a reaction to threats of liquidation.
1a) These quotes are attributed to Martin Reeves from the August report
"I have been giving significant thought over the last few days to an alternative way forward to that that I was pushing with SISU last week – the details of this will come as no surprise to any of you as I have put it together during a number of discussions."
My proposal and its key features are as follows: "CCC should unilaterally buy out the loan and then refinance the YB loan to ACL, but with the support and agreement of Higgs as our partner..."
Doesn't that imply that SISU were made aware of the intention for CCC to buy out the loan and refinance?
2) Why did the £6M or so SISU expected to pay for the debt eventually become £14M that CCC paid.
Was YB in contact with SISU and CCC and playing one of against the other?
3) What was Daniel Gidneys involvement at YB, he left post as Chief Executive at ACL to go to YB in Oct 2012.
4) The agreement to purchase AEHC shares was not by CCFC, but "SISU or another SISU Group Company (“SISU”) will purchase the 50% interest in ACL".
What would that mean for the club, it certainly seems like they would not own the Arena, even if they became entitled to low rent and matchday revenue streams.
Seems to me like ARVO or similar would have ended up owing the Arena.
Finally as Dal points out this document is a "SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT AND THIRD PARTIES" ie it is only the evidence put forward by
so it is hardly going to paint a rosy picture of the claimants position!
Last edited by a moderator:
Sky Blue Dal
Well-Known Member
This document is just a SISU court argument statement against Higgs which there barristers would have written and collated this themselves and filed to the court then sent a copy to the Higgs charity at the same time Higgs would have there own court argument statement which SISU and the court would also have.
How I know this? because it is normal financial court hearing procedure ... When I went to court for my financial ancillary relief hearing during my divorce, my barrister had to collated and send my argument statement to my ex and the judge and she had to do the same so we can prepare for the hearing and argue our case regarding the contents within this statment and the accusations made against each other.
Be nice to see Higgs Charities argument statement to get a balanced picture.
Don't know how this was leaked but it does sound like under handed work going on here.
Could it be that Higgs may have leaked this as they, SISU and the court would only be the one's who would have had this statement.
How I know this? because it is normal financial court hearing procedure ... When I went to court for my financial ancillary relief hearing during my divorce, my barrister had to collated and send my argument statement to my ex and the judge and she had to do the same so we can prepare for the hearing and argue our case regarding the contents within this statment and the accusations made against each other.
Be nice to see Higgs Charities argument statement to get a balanced picture.
Don't know how this was leaked but it does sound like under handed work going on here.
Could it be that Higgs may have leaked this as they, SISU and the court would only be the one's who would have had this statement.
Last edited:
L
limoncello
Guest
Do you mean 'collated'? If not, I'm lost.
mark82
Super Moderator
Think much of this was heard after the 290k was dismissed. Am wondering now if the 290k counter claim was to prevent ACL withdrawing the case against Sisu.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No, to me it reads that they had discussed sisu buying out the loan, but he's subsequently thought of an alternative - CCC buying out the loan.
"An alternative to that that I was pushing with sisu" I.e. an alternative to what was discussed with sisu.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
No, to me it reads that they had discussed sisu buying out the loan, but he's subsequently thought of an alternative - CCC buying out the loan.
"An alternative to that that I was pushing with sisu" I.e. an alternative to what was discussed with sisu.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
It is an odd way of phrasing it if that is what he meant, do any of these people have GCSE English?
It does not make sense to read it that way, but I can see what you mean.
Would be best to get clarification from the author.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is also quite interesting:
65.
It further emerges from the contemporary documents that further key
requirements of the arrangements between the Council and AEHC, and
the Bank, were that:
(a)
ACL would refrain from taking insolvency action against the Club
until after ACL’s debt to the Bank had been paid off using the
Council’s Loan, presumably on the basis that making the Arena’s
anchor tenant insolvent would fatally undermine ACL’s viability
and would make the Bank’s ACL debt worthless.
(b)
AEHC would cooperate with the Council in a public relations
campaign designed to paint the conduct of the Council, AEHC and
ACL in as good a light as possible and to discredit the SISU
Group so far as possible.
65.
It further emerges from the contemporary documents that further key
requirements of the arrangements between the Council and AEHC, and
the Bank, were that:
(a)
ACL would refrain from taking insolvency action against the Club
until after ACL’s debt to the Bank had been paid off using the
Council’s Loan, presumably on the basis that making the Arena’s
anchor tenant insolvent would fatally undermine ACL’s viability
and would make the Bank’s ACL debt worthless.
(b)
AEHC would cooperate with the Council in a public relations
campaign designed to paint the conduct of the Council, AEHC and
ACL in as good a light as possible and to discredit the SISU
Group so far as possible.
Nick
Administrator
Exactly, I will be extra vigilant with new members, but unfortunately there is no real way to tell
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
By the time we get to those bits though, it's not quoting of mails, but a subjective conclusion in reference to an argument?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Exactly, I will be extra vigilant with new members, but unfortunately there is no real way to tell
Who do you think http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/members/7171-HoundDog1987 was planted by?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
I expect to see outrage at the Council ripping off a Coventry children's charity on here as well.