Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Breaking News - Judge kicks out SISU's judicial review against CCC / ACL (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter deanocity3
  • Start date Aug 6, 2013
Forums New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
Next
First Prev 4 of 7 Next Last

Warwickhunt

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #106
deanocity3 said:
The Council have won, but they still putting up your council tax next year
Click to expand...
And the Council have got to find £19million of Cuts this year, i don't know where the council is going to find the money because normally they have a contigency fund for this sort of event but for som reason they have'nt got one anymore
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #107
skybluehugh said:
Temper, temper.

Please review your replies to my posts and THEN tell me who made this personal. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Shut up, ignore me, stop being a cocksucker and trying to deliberately derail a thread for whatever agenda.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #108
the clubs response is

Short statement following this morning's Judicial Review ruling
Coventry City Football Club has noted the ruling by Mr Justice Males on the Judicial Review and will consider the decision before taking its next steps.


Read more at http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/club-statement-060813-971908.aspx#xuo3HvXztr2ppB5A.99

interesting as the club apparently now rests with Otium who were not party to the JR claim which was instigated by SISU, ARVO and CCFC H. I would suggest the club has no steps to take in this.
 

DazzleTommyDazzle

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #109
duffer said:
I think the chances of ACL getting the lost rent have gone with the Administration.
Click to expand...

This is the bit I'm not sure about.

I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that ACL took legal advice on all aspects of the administration before they made their decision to reject the CVA.

Rejecting the CVA was always likely to lead to the proposed liquidation and hence the loss of the £590k (if I remember correctly) offer. So why not take it?

If I'd been in ACL's situation and a creditor had walked away from contracted debts and then told me that (despite what the most recent accounts said) the relevant company was now non-trading, I'd have been straight on to the most aggressive lawyers I could find and briefed them to go after the associated companies and the Directors.

Will this be the next step from ACL?
 

Sub

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #110
im glad mr fisher stated in his previous statement that we can concentrate on football matters nowointlaugh:
 

Sisued

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #111
So these legal fees couldn't possibly end up on otiums books then?
 

jimmyhillsfanclub

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #112
Sisued said:
goldsharer
Click to expand...

Man with the Golden Share.

For Joy...."The world is not enough"
 
S

skybluehugh

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #113
I am getting more and more pissed off with SSN. No mention at all about the major decision regarding our club. Unless it's Hearts, Rangers or Pompy we are just a filler when they have a couple of minutes to fill.
 

sw88

Chief Commentator!
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #114
How long before the club release a statement in response?
 

deanocity3

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #115
On Her Majesty's Secret Sisu
with Joy Seppala as miss notapennymore
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #116
was told that Labovitch will be on SSN around 2 30 not sure if it is correct though.

he might even pull the interview following todays news
 

The Penguin

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #117
sw88 said:
How long before the club release a statement in response?
Click to expand...

They have.

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/club-statement-060813-971908.aspx
 
S

skybluehugh

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #118
Deleted member 5849 said:
Shut up, ignore me, stop being a cocksucker and trying to deliberately derail a thread for whatever agenda.[/

You do like your name calling don't you.
Click to expand...
 

deanocity3

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #119
sw88 said:
How long before the club release a statement in response?
Click to expand...

they have,its the shortest statement ever...F**K you
 

The Penguin

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #120
oldskyblue58 said:
was told that Labovitch will be on SSN around 2 30 not sure if it is correct though.

he might even pull the interview following todays news
Click to expand...

I hope not. I want to see/hear how he tries to flub his way around this.
 

Sisued

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #121
jimmyhillsfanclub said:
Man with the Golden Share.

For Joy...."The world is not enough"
Click to expand...

Skyblues are forever
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #122
DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Rejecting the CVA was always likely to lead to the proposed liquidation and hence the loss of the £590k (if I remember correctly) offer. So why not take it?

If I'd been in ACL's situation and a creditor had walked away from contracted debts and then told me that (despite what the most recent accounts said) the relevant company was now non-trading, I'd have been straight on to the most aggressive lawyers I could find and briefed them to go after the associated companies and the Directors.

Will this be the next step from ACL?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't there then be the danger you do that, we go through the same process again... as said associated companies still owe lots of cash, they get wound up too?

You are right though, it's a slightly absurd decision if there isn't a future 'plan' to reject the cash... although given dropping the JR was a condition (a condition SISU didn't accept - which they could have done to make themselves look better too), one could also assume although thrown out, there was an element of doubt whether it would be.

Which means going forward, nothing is certain.

For a change(!)

I'd contribute to an anti statement fighting fund mind you.
 

deanocity3

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #123
oldskyblue58 said:
was told that Labovitch will be on SSN around 2 30 not sure if it is correct though.

he might even pull the interview following todays news
Click to expand...

I heard that too,not heard anything today
 

covhead1

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #124
I can almost hear timmy crying

Hahahaha
 

The Penguin

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #125
Deleted member 5849 said:
I'd contribute to an anti statement fighting fund mind you.
Click to expand...

After today's statement, so would I.

We've finally hit that point where someone has basically said, "This statement is to say we don't actually really have a statement".
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #126
skybluehugh said:
But and I know it is a big BUT, if it can be proven hat our owners DID move assets from one to the other then ACL/CCC can go after Shitsu not just the club company's . Well I hope so anyway.
Click to expand...

Ooh, it's better than that. I'm not saying this has happened, mind, but if a company's directors are found guilty of fraudulent and/or wrongful trading, then they themselves can be held liable for the debts of the company. (Edit: This includes shadow directors, fwiw).

This is something I think the liquidator would typically investigate, rather than the creditors. But if the creditors don't think the liquidator is doing a robust enough job I presume they can challenge his decisions in court. This in much the same way Mr Appleton may find himself challenged.

I don't know the former as fact, I should say - the latter about PA is true though I believe, there is a right to challenge an administrator's decision in court.
 
Last edited: Aug 6, 2013
S

skybluehugh

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #127
Deleted member 5849 said:
Shut up, ignore me, stop being a cocksucker and trying to deliberately derail a thread for whatever agenda.
Click to expand...

Also can you please show any post on here other than the ones to YOU, where I have tried to derail this thread?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #128
The Penguin said:
After today's statement, so would I.

We've finally hit that point where someone has basically said, "This statement is to say we don't actually really have a statement".
Click to expand...

Frankly it's one of the few I can handle.

Apart from the fact it's a statement that announces a prelude to another statement.

And here we go again!
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #129
skybluehugh said:
Also can you please show any post on here other than the ones to YOU, where I have tried to derail this thread?
Click to expand...

Nice of you to admit to trying to derail the thread. Please stop, ignore me if I offend you that much.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #130
ccfcmustang said:
Where is True Sky Blue? Would love to see his take on this, PUSB
Click to expand...


He's boarding up his letterbox.
 
S

skybluehugh

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #131
Sisued said:
Skyblues are forever
Click to expand...

Not just for Christmas
 

sw88

Chief Commentator!
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #132
The Penguin said:
They have.

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/club-statement-060813-971908.aspx
Click to expand...

Short. Not sweet. And surprisingly not aggressive
 
S

skybluehugh

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #133
duffer said:
Ooh, it's better than that. I'm not saying this has happened, mind, but if a company's directors are found guilty of fraudulent and/or wrongful trading, then they themselves can be held liable for the debts of the company.

This is something I think the liquidator would typically investigate, rather than the creditors. But if the creditors don't think the liquidator isn't doing a robust enough job I presume they can challenge his decisions in court. This in much the same way Mr Appleton may find himself challenged.

I don't know the former as fact, I should say - the latter about PA is true though I believe, there is a right to challenge an administrator's decision in court.
Click to expand...

Am I right in thinking that Appleton still has to go back to court and explain why he has made the decisions he has made? It could be interesting to hear his excuses.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #134
DazzleTommyDazzle said:
This is the bit I'm not sure about.

I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that ACL took legal advice on all aspects of the administration before they made their decision to reject the CVA.

Rejecting the CVA was always likely to lead to the proposed liquidation and hence the loss of the £590k (if I remember correctly) offer. So why not take it?

If I'd been in ACL's situation and a creditor had walked away from contracted debts and then told me that (despite what the most recent accounts said) the relevant company was now non-trading, I'd have been straight on to the most aggressive lawyers I could find and briefed them to go after the associated companies and the Directors.

Will this be the next step from ACL?
Click to expand...

Yep - not saying that that won't happen, but the tricky thing is that CCFC Ltd is a separate entity in law. I don't know how you could extend the claim to the associated companies. Similarly, with the claims against the directors, I'm not sure you can do much more than flag it up to the relevant authorities like the police (for fraud) and the Administrator and/or liquidator.

I think this is why ACL voted down the CVA, because they genuinely believe there's something that needs investigating more thoroughly than Appleton has done, and this is their best chance of getting that investigation.

I'm not trying to defend SISU here to be clear. I'd like them to come to the table and negotiate honestly to get CCFC back home. Failing that I'd enjoy seeing them pulled apart limb by limb (metaphorically speaking).
 
S

skybluehugh

New Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #135
Deleted member 5849 said:
Nice of you to admit to trying to derail the thread. Please stop, ignore me if I offend you that much.
Click to expand...

Just like Fisher, very selective in how interpret what is in front of you.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #136
skybluehugh said:
Just like Fisher, very selective in how interpret what is in front of you.
Click to expand...

Please stop trying to derail the thread, please ignore me if I offend you that much.
 

DazzleTommyDazzle

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #137
Deleted member 5849 said:
Wouldn't there then be the danger you do that, we go through the same process again... as said associated companies still owe lots of cash, they get wound up too?

You are right though, it's a slightly absurd decision if there isn't a future 'plan' to reject the cash... although given dropping the JR was a condition (a condition SISU didn't accept - which they could have done to make themselves look better too), one could also assume although thrown out, there was an element of doubt whether it would be.

Which means going forward, nothing is certain.

For a change(!)

I'd contribute to an anti statement fighting fund mind you.
Click to expand...

That's true - but if it were established that all the companies were "associated" (in the context of the lease), then if SISU went down the administration route, we'd have a proper administration i.e. the football club would be in administration rather than "a non-trading property owning subsidiary".

Then potential buyers might have a chance of competing on a more level playing field.

Seems I might be in a minority of one, but I think some of the statements have been marvellously entertaining. Much better than the bland nonsense that normally gets pumped out!
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #138
DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Seems I might be in a minority of one, but I think some of the statements have been marvellously entertaining. Much better than the bland nonsense that normally gets pumped out!
Click to expand...

Christ, I know watching |City can addle the mind of what's entertainment but...!

It's just so depressing they can't talk to one another, but can talk about!
 

DazzleTommyDazzle

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #139
duffer said:
Yep - not saying that that won't happen, but the tricky thing is that CCFC Ltd is a separate entity in law. I don't know how you could extend the claim to the associated companies. Similarly, with the claims against the directors, I'm not sure you can do much more than flag it up to the relevant authorities like the police (for fraud) and the Administrator and/or liquidator.

I think this is why ACL voted down the CVA, because they genuinely believe there's something that needs investigating more thoroughly than Appleton has done, and this is their best chance of getting that investigation.

I'm not trying to defend SISU here to be clear. I'd like them to come to the table and negotiate honestly to get CCFC back home. Failing that I'd enjoy seeing them pulled apart limb by limb (metaphorically speaking).
Click to expand...

I think that you'd have to show that the trade was in Ltd, was transferred out to Holdings for no sensible consideration and that it was done to avoid the liabilities in Ltd.

Not sure how easy that would be to prove, but if you could "we'd have a whole new ball game going" (if you're old enough to remember Hugh Johns on Star Soccer!!).
 

DazzleTommyDazzle

Well-Known Member
  • Aug 6, 2013
  • #140
Deleted member 5849 said:
Christ, I know watching |City can addle the mind of what's entertainment but...!

It's just so depressing they can't talk to one another, but can talk about!
Click to expand...

As a serious point, it does show how bad relations have got between the parties.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
Next
First Prev 4 of 7 Next Last
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?