Costs nothing? What are you on tonight. A simple audition with a barrister will cost you upwards of £2,000.
Costs nothing? What are you on tonight. A simple audition with a barrister will cost you upwards of £2,000.This costs nothing - what are you on about!
Costs nothing? What are you on tonight. A simple audition with a barrister will cost you upwards of £2,000.
I'm pretty sure a lawyers letter isn't effecting Mowbrays budget.
Yeah I'm sure that's all it will be, a single letter. They won't follow this up at all. At least you admit you were wrong when you said it would cost nothing.
It’s understood Sisu have called for possible wrongdoing to be investigated in relation to secrecy, misleading statements, failure to act in the public interest and financial loss.
Coincidence that the complaint is made on the day the the main claim under the judicial review collapses?
It says Lawyers prepared the complaint. I'm pretty sure they don't work for free.
So what? In the grand scheme of things it's nothing and if it makes Lucas look over her shoulder after the way she has sold the cities sporting heritage it's worth paying.
Did you charge that when you worked in the game Tony?
An interesting thing for the CT to ask Sepalla would be if SISU have lawyers retained or are they being paid by the hour. If they are retained legal action is, in the grand scheme of things, going to cost SISU very little.
No as the telegraph article doesn't suggest the club is paying? It suggests this is a Sisu matter doesn't it?
So it's a fact then? Maybe Tim's coughing up for it out of his own back pocket.
Given that a JR can only take in to account the situation at a specific point in time, in this case when they loan was given to ACL, how does anything that has happened today impact on the appeal ruling in the JR or indeed any future JR?
No as Dave says they almost certainly have a legal firm hired to deal with disputes.
Almost certainly. That's better than a fact isn't it?
You can't fault their tenacity or focus can you?
If only they wanted the same thing as me.
Well you haven't stated a fact have you?
as I understand matters, the main claim under the JR is that the loan amounted to state aid and should therefore be repaid. As it has been repaid then it is now a non point.
as I understand matters, the main claim under the JR is that the loan amounted to state aid and should therefore be repaid. As it has been repaid then it is now a non point.
Why do all threads you are on become a playground squabble ?
You have to wonder where we'd be if from day one they'd put the amount of effort they put into court cases into getting the club moving in the right direction.
You know fuck all then by the sound of it. Retrospective actions cannot be taken into account. Unfortunate as it would count in sisu's favour.
I'd stick to things you know about if I were you - like talking bollocks
Your not a car park attendant are you?
Given the number of disputes they have ongoing at any one time it seems that half of SISU employees must surely be lawyers & barrister...& the other half accountants.No as Dave says they almost certainly have a legal firm hired to deal with disputes.
Tell you what - I will do a deal.
If you admit you have made money out of Wasps being at the Ricoh I will not post for a month.
Deal?
Well you haven't stated a fact have you?
... And negotiated a deal at the Ricoh similar to Wasps rather than do it their way by moving the club.
You know fuck all then by the sound of it. Retrospective actions cannot be taken into account. Unfortunate as it would count in sisu's favour.
I'd stick to things you know about if I were you - like talking bollocks
Your not a car park attendant are you?
Tell you what - I will do a deal.
If you admit you have made money out of Wasps being at the Ricoh I will not post for a month.
Deal?
The common belief is that a ruling in SISU's favour would lead to a claim for compensation. No reason to think that has changed.
Interesting point though as if Wasps have paid the loan back out of concern that at some point in the future a ruling would force them to do so they must have some level of concern that the claims of SISU are valid.
It said in wasps bond prospectus that as part of the current litigation.
A nice idea but from what I have been told the idea of moving out only came about as ACL refused to come to the table to negotiate a better deal for the club.
When I was told this I went back and looked carefully at PWKH's comments on here and he very pointedly always uses the phrase 'no formal discussions took place', of course at the time we all, myself included, lapped that up as evidence against SISU. With hindsight it seems it was a very deliberate phrasing, the implication being discussions were requested but didn't occur.
There is no claim for compensation. It is not that type of court action.
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?