Judicial Review thread (1 Viewer)

[oldskyblue58]

I might be wrong but I think it's from a higgs memo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

In which case it is no wonder they cant get the figures in the budget to balance ! :laugh:

 

---

[Majik]

"Judge says 1 of main reasons ACL was in financial mess was because club failed to meet legal rent obligations. ACL was sustainable with rent"

I am loving this judge.

 

[Rob S]

Erm... at what point did the council veto the deal?

What I took from the Higgs case transcripts is that the deal fell apart because SISU offered £5m on buy-now, pay-later terms without any security that Higgs could accept. I didn't see any evidence of the Council shooting down the deal, in fact there can't be any because no agreement between Higgs and SISU was ever struck - in essence then, no deal to veto.

(Higgs v Sisu transcript day 3 p155)

'Those irreconcilable differences, as I see it, were

4 that SISU no longer wished to offer a price of the kind

5 set out in the indicative term sheet, the trustees for

6 their part did not wish to go ahead without guarantees

7 of security for the deferred consideration, which SISU

8 was not prepared to offer, nor, from late August

9 onwards, were the trustees seriously interested in

10 pursuing the offer in the term sheet at all because they

11 knew that the council were not prepared to consent to

12 it.'

Ultimately all three parties should share the 'blame'. Higgs wanted their investment money back, Sisu didn't want to shell out full price (according to them, having performed due dil and finding cash-flow & contract liability issues) and the council didn't want Sisu to have an investment.

This is the crux of this whole issue. We can point fingers at any one side but all sides are responsible.

As part of the only fans campaign who has actually called for negotiations based on all stadium occupation scenarios (rent, leasehold, freehold) I have no problem pointing the finger at Sisu as well as everyone else.

 

[shmmeee]

I might be wrong but I think it's from a council memo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

But presented by Sisu QC no?

So would the point be that the council thought rent was a tiny percentage and the club shouldn't be complaining? Surely a look at an OSB thread on here could've set them straight. Of all companies football clubs finances are fairly well analysed.

Not sure what the point being made is. But as I said I have real trouble following this format. The Higgs case looked entirely different while it was going on to what we read afterwards from people who had been there.

 

[The Gentleman]

Sorry to sound a bit thick but flicking in and out due to work. Can anyone give a quick summary as to where we are upto now. Thanks in advance!

 

[Kingokings204]

"Judge says 1 of main reasons ACL was in financial mess was because club failed to meet legal rent obligations. ACL was sustainable with rent"

I am loving this judge.

It's clear the judge isn't falling for the bollocks. Let's just all agree a deal tonight over a cold beer and we all kiss and make up and back to the Ricoh and we all move forward. Promotion hopefully.

It's nice to dream.

 

[stupot07]

Judge says ACL sustainable with £1.3m rent....


Unfortunate ccfc is not sustainable with £1.3m rent...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[sky blue john]

Sisu and Aeg were drawing up a draft agreement once Sisu owned 50% of acl. Sisu qc said .

How is this even possible with all the contracts already in place ?

 

[Jack Griffin]

Judge: “There were two commercial courses being pursued and it may have been necessary to keep one confidential from the other. Are you saying there was anything wrong in that?”

Personally I see nothing wrong in multiple strategies.. in fact only common sense, its called hedging your bets, LOL

 

[Rob S]

They have the dad out of inbetweeners representing them?

That will be ACL director & council finance director Chris West.

 

[_brian_]

(Higgs v Sisu transcript day 3 p155)

"p155"!!! LOL!!! You can say* that again!!!

(*Type.)

 

[Kingokings204]

To be fair I think sisu have fucked it. They want back at the Ricoh and ccc won't let them apart from rental deal. With anyone else I think they would sell up.

Ultimately ACL/ccc hold all the cards really. If they don't want sisu back then they won't. Sounds like sisu want to desperately come back. Bit more convinced now they will sell up upon losing this case. Why carry on in Northampton? Just simple no point at all.

This judge sounds fair. I bet he will say to both sides stop messing around and agree a low rental deal with income streams and piss off home.

 

[stupot07]

But presented by Sisu QC no?

So would the point be that the council thought rent was a tiny percentage and the club shouldn't be complaining? Surely a look at an OSB thread on here could've set them straight. Of all companies football clubs finances are fairly well analysed.

Not sure what the point being made is. But as I said I have real trouble following this format. The Higgs case looked entirely different while it was going on to what we read afterwards from people who had been there.

Yeah I think so. If you remember right at the start Mutton was saying the same thing, I.e nothing wrong with the rent, only a tiny percentage of clubs turnover, bigger costs, no need to look here, nothing to see, etc. and using duff information to inform decisions, and therefore putting the club at risk, which then would put ACL at risk, questioning the decision making process I suppose....that's the only angle I can see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[ccfcway]

i'm still struggling to understand why SISU have bought this to court ?

What am in missing ?

 

[TheRoyalScam]

That will be ACL director & council finance director Chris West.

Sorry to be pedantic but CW is an ex-Acl director.

 

[Jack Griffin]

That will be ACL director & council finance director Chris West.

I liked him better "In the thick of it"

 

[ccfcway]

Judge....

“ACL were in a commercial mess because the football club had not been paying the rent and licence fees it was bound legally to pay. It was trying to find a way out of that commercial mess.”

Judge says one of those ways was a deal with Sisu, one a deal with Yorkshire Bank and ACL was exploring both.

 

[duffer]

(Higgs v Sisu transcript day 3 p155)

'Those irreconcilable differences, as I see it, were

4 that SISU no longer wished to offer a price of the kind

5 set out in the indicative term sheet, the trustees for

6 their part did not wish to go ahead without guarantees

7 of security for the deferred consideration, which SISU

8 was not prepared to offer, nor, from late August

9 onwards, were the trustees seriously interested in

10 pursuing the offer in the term sheet at all because they

11 knew that the council were not prepared to consent to

12 it.'

Ultimately all three parties should share the 'blame'. Higgs wanted their investment money back, Sisu didn't want to shell out full price (according to them, having performed due dil and finding cash-flow & contract liability issues) and the council didn't want Sisu to have an investment.

This is the crux of this whole issue. We can point fingers at any one side but all sides are responsible.

As part of the only fans campaign who has actually called for negotiations based on all stadium occupation scenarios (rent, leasehold, freehold) I have no problem pointing the finger at Sisu as well as everyone else.

Yep, that's fair enough - although again, I can't see where the evidence is that there was a deal to shoot down, given there was clearly no agreement on price or more clearly how it was to be paid. Regardless, you've got to accept the judge's take on this, given.

As for negotiation on all possible routes back to the Ricoh, forgive me Rob but the impression I've got of your side of the campaign has been more about pushing the Council to sell either the freehold or long leasehold.

 

[sky blue john]

I think the judge wants to wrap this up today !!

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Surely sisu have something 'new' and 'exclusive' that 'will shock'...??

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Seems like a lot of 'bluster' from sisu.

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

@TheSimonGilbert: Court hears CBRE valuation of ACL was £19.5m with £1.2m rent per annum and £6.4m with no rent.

 

[AndreasB]

Be aware OSB , your point isn't acceptable to some because you might be in the labour party

There does seem to be a bit of an unhealthy Libertarian streak in some of the anti council rhetoric as an agenda against them not just to do with football - just because they have been in power for 75 years doesnt automatically make them corrupt does it?

 

[Gint11]

Sounds like SISU are losing.....

 

[John_Silletts_Nose]

(Higgs v Sisu transcript day 3 p155)

'Those irreconcilable differences, as I see it, were

4 that SISU no longer wished to offer a price of the kind

5 set out in the indicative term sheet, the trustees for

6 their part did not wish to go ahead without guarantees

7 of security for the deferred consideration, which SISU

8 was not prepared to offer, nor, from late August

9 onwards, were the trustees seriously interested in

10 pursuing the offer in the term sheet at all because they

11 knew that the council were not prepared to consent to

12 it.'

Ultimately all three parties should share the 'blame'. Higgs wanted their investment money back, Sisu didn't want to shell out full price (according to them, having performed due dil and finding cash-flow & contract liability issues) and the council didn't want Sisu to have an investment.

This is the crux of this whole issue. We can point fingers at any one side but all sides are responsible.

As part of the only fans campaign who has actually called for negotiations based on all stadium occupation scenarios (rent, leasehold, freehold) I have no problem pointing the finger at Sisu as well as everyone else.

Rob S - your reply proves the point that there was no veto applied on any deal. There was an interpretation by SISU that any such deal would receive a veto but that is an interpretation rather than a veto. It may be that a veto would have been applied and it may have been likely but in reality it did not happen.

As you stated in an earlier post, everyone will interpret the comments in the light of their own views to support their own stance.

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Council haven't even spoken and sisu are making themselves look more incompetent by the hour...

 

[Rob S]

What the Judge said on the Higgs case

“On the facts, as I perceive them, by the time the trustees entered into an agreement to vary the joint venture agreement on 14 January 2013, the transaction contemplated by the term sheet had already fallen apart or fallen away, to use Miss Deering's expressions this morning, long before that. It follows that the criticisms made of the trustees by SISU as to the propriety of their conduct in December or January and the arguments made about them undermining the bargain by their actions at that time seem to me to be misplaced and it is unfortunate that allegations were made in some of the terms which have been put forward by SISU in these proceedings. I have come to the conclusion, however, that in circumstances where the transaction fell apart or fell away in August 2012, effectively because neither party wished to pursue the transaction contained in the term sheet, that is not a circumstance in which the trustees are entitled to recover their wasted costs.” MR JUSTICE LEGGATT

Useful that you've pulled out this. In Keith Perry's CT article today

Sisu are claiming the council’s decision to make the loan (to be repaid over 40 years) was irrational and motivated by a desire to “drive Sisu out of Coventry and force Sisu to sell to new owners”.

The conspiracy argument was also made in last month’s Higgs v Sisu court case and rejected by the judge as “misplaced”.

Quite serious to misquote a judge. He did not say that claims the council were involved in a conspiracy were misplaced.

Hopefully the Cov Tel will correct this as it is very serious to misrepresent a High Court judge. They don't tend to like that kind of thing

 

[duffer]

Just because the Judge appears to be being harsh to the SISU QC, I wouldn't take bets on the outcome of the case yet. It's just as likely he'll tear apart any flaws he sees in the Council QC's argument. I sense it's just what Judges like to do.

 

[ccfcway]

ACL valued at £6.4m based on CCFC playing no rent.
Council initially offered Yorkshire Bank £6m to buy ACL’s debt.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Simon Gilbert @TheSimonGilbert · 6m

Court hears CBRE valuation of ACL was £19.5m with £1.2m rent per annum and £6.4m with no rent.

Replied to 0 times

Well SISU kept that sodding quiet!

One must presume that ~400K pa would value it somewhere between £19.5M & £6M..

 

[Sky Blues]

So am I reading this correctly, a hedge fund is complaining that someone else... hedged?

 

[Sky Blues]

@TheSimonGilbert: Court hears CBRE valuation of ACL was £19.5m with £1.2m rent per annum and £6.4m with no rent.

So, not "nothing" then?...

 

[The Gentleman]

Just because the Judge appears to be being harsh to the SISU QC, I wouldn't take bets on the outcome of the case yet. It's just as likely he'll tear apart any flaws he sees in the Council QC's argument. I sense it's just what Judges like to do.

Or it could just be the fact that he may be thinking, is this it FFS.

 

[TheRoyalScam]

Surely sisu have something 'new' and 'exclusive' that 'will shock'...??

They have: a video of Cllr Mutton chanting 'We Want SISU Out' along with 10,000* others, including me and Scam Jnr

Disclaimer: *obviously Grendull or RFC weren't chanting this

 

[ccfcway]

Away from the High Court, former Sky Blues keeper Chris Dunn has signed for Cambridge