.... or they go to court and say they have not got all the information they require (Requested but refused by court) and the judge adjourns to enable them to get the information.
After thinking about it, you may be right. I heard she occasionally wears a stetson and dabbles with oil, or was that just the buffoon Fishers wishful thinking !
Sorry to break up on the jokes but the whole JR demonstrates to me on how disingenuous SISU have been regarding the Ricoh, have been planning to build a new stadium for 12 months according to Fisher, not returning etc.. so why are they continuing with this potentially costly legal action. its all about the Ricoh they want it so badly they are prepared to take the team out of Coventry.
I thought the judge had said they enough information to make the appeal and that was why the request was refused. Therefore if they can't make the appeal with the information that they already have.......is the appeal likely to succeed?
Ha! It had to be Thursday, didn't it?!
The day when to Cov news mill goes into overdrive!
WM
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Another genuine question.
What grounds did they have to make the appeal anyway? I thought things were only able to be appealed if either the process wasn't followed, or new information came to light?
If it's just appeal after appeal after appeal... this could take a while!
I am not sure if it is an appeal as such, I think every JR application is a fresh one based on new evidence.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
So any idea what the fresh evidence they're presenting is?
Have they got anymore fresh evidence for the next one?
Would a fine conspiracy theory be to say they hold evidence back until the time they actually want it to go to review?
Who knows. The request for fresh evidence in the form of internal communications from the council was turned down. I can't see there being any evidence that isn't already in the public domain, but who knows.
the original judgement was given on the basis of the written evidence supplied to the court. Thursday sees the oral examination of the same evidence and is happening because SISU etc have the right to request an oral hearing if the first judgement goes against them. It is not a case to examine the rights or wrong of the facts it is a process to decide if the case has enough merit to go to a full court case
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Followed by mime artists.
@
In recognition of today's communication tools perhaps a submission made within the character constraints of Twitter would encourage brevity and thus speed us to the final denouement.
Apparently Fisher found an old receipt in the back pocket of the trousers he wore to the meeting with ACL/CCC. In all seriousness though, does dragging this through courts and appeals not suit Sisu but harm the football club and any chance of a speedy return to the Ricoh, or alternatively slow them up building our mythical meccano stadium. I wonder where the costs for all this will be laid..........
Yep, that's as I understand it too. About 85% of these reviews fail. Where the review succeeds, about the same percentage fail when it gets to court. In other words, the odds of SISU winning are pretty long (based on a coarse statisitical analysis at least, plus the fact that the original decision seemed somewhat damning of their case as presented).
If this review fails, I think that's it for this specific case. I suppose SISU could apply for another JR under entirely different grounds, but this one would be dead.
I think we can all hazard an educated guess as to where the cost of all this are going...onto the ever increasing debt pile of CCFC
Sorry to break up the seriousness & for any sarcasm...but none of us ever suspected SISU were disingenuous did we? Missed that one...& err...the Ricoh is immovable, it's in Coventry - so if they got it...surely they'd bring us Home anyway.
Just a thought Sisu, otium, Arvo, ccfc wasn't this a joint case against ccc. If so who will be liable for the costs which could end up far greater than what was ever owed in rent.
If Sisu lose and have to pay this costs and don't are they just setting up liquidation of another company ?
If Sisu lose and have to pay this costs and don't are they just setting up liquidation of another company ?
Someone will be along to tell me I'm wrong, but I thought "costs" only applied in an actual court case. This is a request for a JR, so I'd assume each party pays their own costs up front, no?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
With as little knowledge as you, I'd always assumed each side needed a lawyer for this kind of thing, but as it's just a hearing to see if a Judicial Review actually happens or not, costs won't exactly break the bank.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Sorry to be obvious, but buildings & land usually is pretty immobile.. nevertheless they're worth having as assets..
