IrishSkyBlue
Facebook User
Be interesting to see who backs down first or offers the olive branch, i think maybe all partys will be so stubborn it still might not get resolved even with legals decision now made and in theory stopped.
I know you’re joking but is it even allowed in contract law to insert a clause that your tenant, or any associated company, can not take any legal action against you at any point in the future?So as it stands, there's no legals so deal by the end of the day for the Ricoh
This won't be the end...
For now Wasps & CCC are in a position that UK courts have proven them vindicated and that SISU have never had an arguable case
Vindicated only in a legal sense
Just because they've been going the JR route doesn't mean there aren't other avenues they can't pursue before any civil case, anyway.Do people really think SISU are just going to drop it now? If they can’t appeal this to a higher level they’ll just start up the civil case this has all been leading to.
OSB could they sign an agreement of no more legals naming WASPs as an interested party? (Still gives them option to chase CCC)
I imagine it is possible to insert an end of season break clause. I don't think the EFL would sanction any weaker terms.I know you’re joking but is it even allowed in contract law to insert a clause that your tenant, or any associated company, can not take any legal action against you at any point in the future?
There is no verdict because they have simply declined to hear the appeal. The point of an appeal is that it asks a higher authority to look again at a judgment made further down the chain (in the high court, in this case) and there has to be a valid point of law i.e. that the judge made an error in their conclusions, that would get the thing looked into. The actual rights/wrongs of the case are not criteria for whether the Supreme Court hear an appeal.Assume the full verdict hasn’t been released but how is it not if public importance that the council might have done the taxpayer out of tens of millions? And if it’s not why was the case heard in the first place?
That doesn’t read as if they’re saying it’s right or wrong legally. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable can explain.
So what do they mean by adding of public importance? To me that reads like there is an argument but it’s been decided it shouldn’t be heard. If this is all we’re getting, with no further detail, doesn’t that immediately open the door for the next appeal.There is no verdict because they have simply declined to hear the appeal. The point of an appeal is that it asks a higher authority to look again at a judgment made further down the chain (in the high court, in this case) and there has to be a valid point of law i.e. that the judge made an error in their conclusions, that would get the thing looked into. The actual rights/wrongs of the case are not criteria for whether the Supreme Court hear an appeal.
So what do they mean by adding of public importance? To me that reads like there is an argument but it’s been decided it shouldn’t be heard. If this is all we’re getting, with no further detail, doesn’t that immediately open the door for the next appeal.
I don't think that's what thy mean. They mean that the appeal, if heard, would be to overturn a judge's decision. The original decision was based on the judge's interpretation of the law, but if this interpretation was faulty then as a matter of public importance then the judgement should be queried. But they seem to be saying that nothing in SISU's application to appeal included such an aspect.So what do they mean by adding of public importance? To me that reads like there is an argument but it’s been decided it shouldn’t be heard. If this is all we’re getting, with no further detail, doesn’t that immediately open the door for the next appeal.
It’s either that or the civil route now surely ?Heard a rumour a while back that SISU want the case to get to the European Court, as they take a dim view of councils not doing the best for their residents.
Anyone know if this opens the door to European Courts?
Be interesting to see who backs down first or offers the olive branch, i think maybe all partys will be so stubborn it still might not get resolved even with legals decision now made and in theory stopped.
How long can season ticket sales be delayed?Nah, let's be optimistic, this is it by Good Friday they will have all kissed and made up and ST 's will be on sale for the Ricoh by May !
But if Wasps acted in good faith and paid what was asked and agreed, it is solely the council's problem.Not sure if they could because Wasps are the other half of the transaction..... any judgement against CCC would affect Wasps
Quite possibly, depends on the scope and whether it has an impact on Wasps I suppose (because if it did then you'd assume they would not be able to bring it without breaking any deal made with Wasps). In theory though I see no reason SISU can't agree a tenancy with Wasps and then go after CCC on something separate that doesn't involve them as an interested party.They still have a Civil case to bring if CCC do not co-operate?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?