Higgs vs CCFC Court Row (64 Viewers)

Astute · Apr 2, 2014

Grendel said:
My obsession is with CCFC a football club you've never ever watched.

Why we keep feeding this troll I don't know.

We don't keep feeding you. You just keep finding scraps that nobody else would touch.

Astute · Apr 2, 2014

Godiva said:
The value of the distressed mortgage was discussed here back then with figures between £5m and £8m. CCC paying OTT is not only poor business it's also a waste of public funds.
CCC never to my knowledge discussed selling their shares for £8m - it was part of my reasoning back then. And in fact many have said sisu should first buy Higgs shares then negotiate to buy CCC's shares. As Higgs and CCC have the exact same amount of shares it is reasonable to believe the price for each half would be the same?

What distressed mortgage is this that you have mentioned many times?

Or are you on about the one that SISU attempted to make distressed by not paying the rent. They attempted to make it even more distressed by moving our club out of Coventry. Distressed means that payments were not made. And no matter what SISU did they kept up with the payments. Or do you have evidence to show differently?

SISU had contact with YB over the mortgage. Had the bank a bit worried about the debt. But this is different than it not being paid.

It is about time that SISU went to ACL with their tail between their legs and agree to a deal, build the stadium that we have to wait 3 weeks to find out about or sell our club to the highest bidder.

James Smith · Apr 2, 2014

So does the fact that the counter claim has been disposed(?) mean that we now know for a fact the Higgs didn't collude with the council?

Astute · Apr 2, 2014

James Smith said:
So does the fact that the counter claim has been disposed(?) mean that we now know for a fact the Higgs didn't collude with the council?

To me it just means that Higgs didn't plan anything with CCC whilst in the agreed six weeks time frame as was agreed by both parties. It also seems that they warned SISU that they were looking at other options months later. So SISU wouldn't be able to claim that they knew nothing about what could happen.

But I do think that the colluding with CCC was covered by when they spoke about their options. Options that would have to have been discussed. All I can see now with the JR is deciding whether it was funded the right way. And I can't see massive damages being awarded for this if it goes the way of SISU.

shmmeee · Apr 2, 2014

Does anyone else think that perhaps their reputation as some kind of legal wonders is undeserved?

Maybe they're as incompetent here as they are at running clubs and PR.

The case for a conspiracy seems non-existent, even if the state aid things goes through it's looking unlikely that they'd get damages looking at the timescales they've disclosed.

In fact, considering the threats from Joy, if I was CCC If be filing suit for loss of earnings as it's obviously a move designed to punish the council.

Kingokings204 · Apr 2, 2014

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-j udiciary/judicial-review

This may help some if not already.

skybluetony176 · Apr 2, 2014

Kingokings204 said:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-j udiciary/judicial-review

This may help some if not already.

Is it me or is the reason sisu have sought JR not covered by the list of what JR can be sought for?

Is it possible that a judge could just say that the case doesn't fall under the jurisdiction of JR and throw it straight out?

sky blue john · Apr 2, 2014

Kingokings204 said:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-j udiciary/judicial-review

This may help some if not already.

Well reading that I can't see what Sisu hope to achieve ?

Astute · Apr 2, 2014

Kingokings204 said:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-j udiciary/judicial-review

This may help some if not already.

I think that just about all of us understand what it is about.

The big question is what is in it for SISU? Was it a threat of litigation where they thought they would get their own way, or was it with the thought of getting damages awarded at a later date? I don't see them doing it just to show the world that they were morally right as they don't seem to understand the word moral. When was the last time that they won a court case?

I fear for the future of our football club. Things are not looking too good for SISU ATM. They don't seem to be the type to compromise.

New ground? No proof. Waste of money?

Negotiate a return to the Ricoh? SISU don't seem to do negotiations.

We can't stay in Northampton for ever. The FL seem to be on their case now. How long would they keep throwing money away?

Sell? Not at the bottom Joy said. So what is left?

Kingokings204 · Apr 2, 2014

I don't see it either guys. We have been speculating for months but this link seems pretty clear to me.

The court doesn't care about the end outcome or decision but how it was done so this is where the sisu claim of state aid by the council comes in.

So what if Sisu win which I don't think they will they wont even get anything an if so then just minor stakes. I see the this summer as make or break for sisu either make and acquire the ricoh by crook or sell up as nothing left that can be done apart from wasting more millions at Northampton which Sisu aren't that stupid. They thought figure would be around double what they are this gap is too much to "cover the losses"

Agree with Astute .... either low rental deal, build own stadia or sell up.

Liquidation is a weird one yes they could asset strip (Wilson et al) and then liquidate but surely someone who with help could wipe off some debt and chuck a few million at it.

Kingokings204 · Apr 2, 2014

sky blue john said:
Well reading that I can't see what Sisu hope to achieve ?

Good point John. The claim is not on the outcome but how it was done i.e state aid to fund the ricoh, state aid being the council but just seems a long shot in the dark and I can only assume its the big threat of legalities and money to lawyers that was the threat as proved yesterday with 8 lawyers to 2 but if the council stick to their guns they will win the case.

Sisu knew yesterday was a waste of time and money and purely hoped the 290k counter claim would make higgs think shit we can do with out this and drop the case. Day 1 and the judge isn't even interested in it.

People say the JR is different to this case? Well not much the principals and morals are the same. Sisu as a fact didn't conclude the deal in the 6 week time frame given and lost out. Same case for the JR. They missed the train and will therefore lose.

The Prefect · Apr 2, 2014

SISU have a reputation of being litigious. They're regulars in court and they don't always win.

In this case their counter claim was dismissed very quickly so it seems that it was without foundation. Nothing more than sabre-rattling designed to bully the Higgs Charity. One of SISU's negotiating tactics is stalling and moving goalposts. It works brilliantly when you're buying distressed businesses from owners that are set to loose everything when things go wrong. It doesn't work when you need to acquire something from sellers that don't need to sell and can name their price - in these instances SISU have proven to be as incompetent as they are at running our football club. If you refuse to deal under an agreed timescale you can expect to loose in court. If their best legal arguments are 'implied terms' they need to get better lawyers.

I wish the Higgs Charity every success with their action for their monies. Paying what they rightfully owe is something SISU struggle to do and however you dress it up it leads to distrust in their business dealings and with the fans of Coventry City.

Whether the judicial review will be successful I don't know. I have my doubts that CCC and Higgs would have moved before any exclusivity clauses expired. Something tells me that if the Ricoh hadn't missed any payments on their mortgage there's an argument it wasn't distressed. In that case it wouldn't be sold to SISU in any case - perhaps they can prove that they had a signed-off deal with the bank rather than an 'implied deal'? We shall have to wait and see.

olderskyblue · Apr 2, 2014

Astute said:
SISU had contact with YB over the mortgage. Had the bank a bit worried about the debt. But this is different than it not being paid.

We've heard that SISU could have bought this mortgage out for £7M, but is there any actual proof that it was possible? or was it just their end game? Not saying their isn't proof, I just can't recall.

The Gentleman · Apr 2, 2014

I wonder where any money will come from to pay (if they have to) any monies owed to Higgs. If it isn't their own money they use and yet more from the pot their investors keep filling, then how will Sisu show this to their investors? What will be Sisu's reasoning to justify using up yet more money (not just what is paid to Higgs but court costs, lawyers etc) that isn't theirs? People on here have said that their investors are that rich they don't care but that i'm afraid is tosh. The reason these people are rich is because they count every penny twice and they are usually very sharp and shrewd about their money, if they were using my money for this kind of shit then I would be looking elsewhere to invest. Maybe this is why Sisu are starting to sling mud everywhere (using Labovitch) because we know they cannot answer the important qusetions and maybe their investors are starting to ask questions too.

sky blue john · Apr 2, 2014

I think maybe that getting pwkh on the stand today is key for Sisu to badger him and get something in the public domain they can use in future cases.
I find Sisu's 8 lawyers & tactics disgusting and hope the judge laughs them out of court.
I know Richardson fucked up our club to the position that sharks took us over. But Sisu are lowest of the low !!!!

Sky Blue Pete · Apr 2, 2014

Pwkh will be fine. It's an expensive way of finding new information and not good tactics.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 2, 2014

Rob S said:
Not too much to add to what's been said apart from:
Loads of time spent on deciding if Sisu's counter claim was valid but no so down to the judges summary of that in the morning then on with the rest of Sisu's case including Peter K-H and Paul Harris on the witness stand followed by Laura Deering on Thu.

I get the feeling that Sisu legal team (a mix of Sisu legal and the QC's own people from Matrix Chambers, hence 8 people in total) were expecting to be knocked back on the counter claim.

The big deal is now really down to how the witnesses perform and the disclosed documents coming out.

If I can get digital copies of what is allowed out I'll try and put them in a public Dropbox folder and share the link here so everyone can dig in.

I'll be in court again tomorrow so more updates and sorry if I've missed any questions – posting via my phone so a bit hampered

Just a couple of questions hope you dont mind Rob

- isnt it now the Higgs case not the SISUs case? SISU's case was dismissed yesterday wasn't it?
- Has the timetable that you set out for witnesses been set/stated by the Judge?
- Will all the other documents actually be relevant? The judge has already stated the duty expired after 6 weeks (June 2012) so how is what happened in Dec 2012 onward relevant?
- doesnt the case now rest on whether the clause in the HOT's for the £29k is valid or not, whether the 6 weeks is the cut off after which there is no agreement, and whether AEHC did anything to obstruct the potential for the deal in the 6 week exclusivity period?
- How do you get hold of the electronic documents from the courts is there some mechanism to do that quickly - it might be useful to know and use when the Judicial Review starts?

I know you might well not be able to answer a lot of those but knowing how to get hold of the docs myself from court would be useful

thanks and thanks for the updates yesterday - very useful

sky blue john · Apr 2, 2014

Sky Blue Pete said:
Pwkh will be fine. It's an expensive way of finding new information and not good tactics.

Will they use balloon gate to make a point ?

ccfcway · Apr 2, 2014

sky blue john said:
Will they use balloon gate to make a point ?

wasnt that all hot air ?

AJB1983 · Apr 2, 2014

I suspect they'll use anything they can to try and paint a picture of everyone but themselves being untrustworthy and underhand, and that they are 'poor sisu being bullied'

chiefdave · Apr 2, 2014

Morning all, ready for another fun day of court action. Who needs the World Cup when you can spend all summer following our court cases!

tisza said:
If the mortgage was available for 8 million why did it end up costing the council 14 million? At what point did the council discuss selling their part of the acl to SISU for 8 million?

Has anyone apart from SISU ever mentioned that the mortgage was available for £8m? Not saying it's not true but with SISU's track record it would be good to see some evidence.

The £8m figure seems to be sourced from a figure YB thought they would be able to recover in a worst case scenario (ie: ACL have been unable to make repayments), to me it doesn't follow that you can then buy it from them for that amount and that's before you consider questions regarding why the mortgage was devalued and if two or more parties were working together to give YB the impression ACL were distressed. Labovich has repeatedly said that kind of thing is illegal so, if that's correct, probably not the best argument to bring to court.

Tonylinc said:
Tim "we batter people in court". Well explain today.

SISU aren't doing well so far are they? 2 cases from ACL regarding non payment of rent were both lost, they threatened legal action against the Guardian and never followed through. The initial JR application was thrown out with some pretty scathing comments from the judge and an application to access CCC documents was rejected. That's all before yesterday which seems to have gone just about as badly as it possibly could. The only thing they've managed to 'win' is persuading the judge in the second JR application that it should proceed.

oldskyblue58 said:
doesnt the case now rest on whether the clause in the HOT's for the £29k is valid or not, whether the 6 weeks is the cut off after which there is no agreement, and whether AEHC did anything to obstruct the potential for the deal in the 6 week exclusivity period?

Think that will pretty much what we're looking at. If the clause exists then the only 'out' for SISU is for them to prove ACL did something underhand / illegal.

duffer · Apr 2, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
Just a couple of questions hope you dont mind Rob

- isnt it now the Higgs case not the SISUs case? SISU's case was dismissed yesterday wasn't it?
- Has the timetable that you set out for witnesses been set/stated by the Judge?
- Will all the other documents actually be relevant? The judge has already stated the duty expired after 6 weeks (June 2012) so how is what happened in Dec 2012 onward relevant?
- doesnt the case now rest on whether the clause in the HOT's for the £29k is valid or not, whether the 6 weeks is the cut off after which there is no agreement, and whether AEHC did anything to obstruct the potential for the deal in the 6 week exclusivity period?
- How do you get hold of the electronic documents from the courts is there some mechanism to do that quickly - it might be useful to know and use when the Judicial Review starts?

I know you might well not be able to answer a lot of those but knowing how to get hold of the docs myself from court would be useful

thanks and thanks for the updates yesterday - very useful

There's a really good point in there, OSB - with regard to the specifics of this case, it seems the judge has already said that it's only the six weeks after signing the HoT that's relevant. Why would he need to hear about stuff that's gone on months after that deadline.

Saying that I'd like nothing better than to get all parties up in front of a judge to get to the bottom of what's happened. It's funny that in all of this time, Fisher has never mentioned that SISU threatened to leave the club high and dry in April 2012. I thought they were here for the long haul.

duffer · Apr 2, 2014

P.S. Sincere thanks to Rob and Simon for the updates yesterday, look forwards to more today.

Danceswithhorses · Apr 2, 2014

duffer said:
It's funny that in all of this time, Fisher has never mentioned that SISU threatened to leave the club high and dry in April 2012. I thought they were here for the long haul.

Yes...how odd that he forgot to tell the fans that

tisza · Apr 2, 2014

Would this financial report referred to yesterday be available under FOI? I can't see what other new information came out yesterday. The time line Of Events seems to be pretty much what PWKH posted on here last year.

mark82 · Apr 2, 2014

Tonylinc said:
Tim "we batter people in court". Well explain today.

I wouldn't worry about this case too much fella, the important one is the JR. By the way, Higgs haven't won this case yet, it is only the Sisu counter claim which has been thrown out. This looked ludicrous when they made it and it has turned out to be so.

What will happen today? Is there more evidence to be heard or is it just the decision on the Higgs claim?

Rob S · Apr 2, 2014

Just checking in. In Greggs grabbing a pasty and large coffee before heading in for the 'fun'.

The Penguin · Apr 2, 2014

Rob S said:
Just checking in. In Greggs grabbing a pasty and large coffee before heading in for the 'fun'.

Oh, drop the quotes, you know you love it

James Smith · Apr 2, 2014

PWKH takes the stand (pun not intended)

Rob S · Apr 2, 2014

PKH on the stand now. Preliminary legal points re: his witness statement

Rob S · Apr 2, 2014

Haha! PKH: no knowledge of sisu out
QC: what about attaching balloons to Fishers car?
PKH: I did not. I placed a half-deflated balloon under the windscreen wiper
!!!
Tim Fisher pissing himself. Hector on the stand later?

Kingokings204 · Apr 2, 2014

Rob S said:
PKH on the stand now. Preliminary legal points re: his witness statement

Thanks for the updates Rob S. Yesterday was great and your efforts are appreciated greatly.

Nick · Apr 2, 2014

He said he had no knowledge about sisu out stuff? Genius

What's that got to do with anything though?

AFCCOVENTRY · Apr 2, 2014

@TheSimonGilbert: Balloon gate has already come up...

AFCCOVENTRY · Apr 2, 2014

Balloons or no balloons... It has nothing to do with sisu having to pay costs to Higgs.

Character assassination in place?

Let's get Tim in the box then..,

Higgs vs CCFC Court Row (64 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency