Council and Sky Blues in court tomorrow (1 Viewer)

SimonGilbert · May 13, 2014

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sky-blues-coventry-city-council-7113090

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

duffer · May 13, 2014

SimonGilbert said:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sky-blues-coventry-city-council-7113090

Ta for the updates Simon. With all this going on wouldn't it be cheaper for the CET to just buy you a flat near the High Court - your expenses must be crippling.

It seems a bit late in the day for this, are SISU still looking for the 'smoking gun'? In truth though I sort of hope they win out on this particular bit of court action - I'd like it all out in the open, no one should be allowed to sit on stuff.

In fairness though, I'd also like SISU to explain what they were doing moving around the assets between CCFC Ltd and Holdings whilst all of these negotiations were going on, supposedly in good faith on their part. That's perhaps an argument for a different time though...

Ian1779 · May 13, 2014

If the council have done everything above board as they make out, publishing some documents that SISU want to see won't be a problem will it??

Grendel · May 13, 2014

Ian1779 said:
If the council have done everything above board as they make out, publishing some documents that SISU want to see won't be a problem will it??

They'll do it immediately I'm sure.

duffer · May 13, 2014

Ian1779 said:
If the council have done everything above board as they make out, publishing some documents that SISU want to see won't be a problem will it??

The problem is that once stuff goes to court both sides will only want to release the 'facts' that suit their case. We've been here before, I think.

I'm all for a truly independent enquiry, in which all sides are obliged to open up - at the moment all we're seeing is the council coming under pressure.

Astute · May 13, 2014

If SISU have done everything above board and their allegations are right they won't need any more information.

diggerdaley · May 13, 2014

Can CCC see sisu's documents relating to their mishandling of the situation ? I thought not...

Nick · May 13, 2014

duffer said:
The problem is that once stuff goes to court both sides will only want to release the 'facts' that suit their case. We've been here before, I think.

I'm all for a truly independent enquiry, in which all sides are obliged to open up - at the moment all we're seeing is the council coming under pressure.

Don't both sides have to disclose all communications relevant, if not people could see themselves in a lot of trouble?

Astute · May 13, 2014

diggerdaley said:
Can CCC see sisu's documents relating to their mishandling of the situation ? I thought not...

You should know by now that it is all the fault of ACL as SISU don't trust them.

James Smith · May 13, 2014

duffer said:
The problem is that once stuff goes to court both sides will only want to release the 'facts' that suit their case. We've been here before, I think.

I'm all for a truly independent enquiry, in which all sides are obliged to open up - at the moment all we're seeing is the council coming under pressure.

I've been keen on an independent enquiry into this for ages and would be very happy if one was arranged.

chiefdave · May 13, 2014

Nick said:
Don't both sides have to disclose all communications relevant, if not people could see themselves in a lot of trouble?

Both sides can disclose any information they have legally obtained. SISU are asking for access to information they don't currently have a legal right to access. From what we've been told there hasn't been an equivalent request for access to any information held by SISU.

James Smith · May 13, 2014

Just so long as the costs of all these court appearances aren't added to the debt of Otium or SBS&L or cost the club anything then I don't mind how often they go to court.

oldskyblue58 · May 13, 2014

so basically SISU think there are documents they are entitled to and CCC think they are not for disclosure. Both will have had legal advice saying they are correct I would think. Only way to settle it is under direction of a high court judge. Nothing really unusual or particularly significant in the process, it often happens before a court case. Both sides disclose their evidence to the other side, usually on the basis of what is very specifically asked for and the minimum that is required.

Is there anything significant in the content? who knows. But not releasing documents is not necessarily evidence of any wrong doing at all there might indeed be very good reasons not to disclose, nor will receiving such evidence necessarily prove to be a case winner the documents might not reveal anything useful to SISU. As such it is not about winning or losing for either side tomorrow, its a matter of legal process

Will those documents be in the public domain after tomorrow almost certainly not. The Judge, if so minded, will make an order to disclose within a time period the documents will not become public until read out in Court (ie at the JR).

That's my understanding anyway. I wouldn't get too excited over what happens tomorrow

wingy · May 13, 2014

Looks like another stage in the PR game to me.

oldskyblue58 · May 13, 2014

An independent inquiry - who is supposed to pay for it? It can not be any of the parties involved in the dispute because it would taint its independence. The government and football authorities have made it pretty plain in their comments (eg the reply to the petition) that they don't view it necessary as it stands. The select committee do not have time or resources for it at the moment.

You wont get much if any change out of £100k in terms of cost and it is likely to cost more than that for a full blown wide ranging inquiry .

Sky Blue Dal · May 13, 2014

Nick said:
Don't both sides have to disclose all communications relevant, if not people could see themselves in a lot of trouble?

They can only disclose what each party has requested and that is relevant to the case. They failed previously so they will have to have a good and legal reason to convince the Judge to set an order for the CCC to release these documents to them

The question is does SISU want the minutes document as they suspect there maybe important information that can be used to aid there case OR a way to use it to smear some of the councillors in that meeting??

Remember, they did say they batter people in court!!

Sky Blue Dal · May 13, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
so basically SISU think there are documents they are entitled to and CCC think they are not for disclosure. Both will have had legal advice saying they are correct I would think. Only way to settle it is under direction of a high court judge. Nothing really unusual or particularly significant in the process, it often happens before a court case. Both sides disclose their evidence to the other side, usually on the basis of what is very specifically asked for and the minimum that is required.

Is there anything significant in the content? who knows. But not releasing documents is not necessarily evidence of any wrong doing at all there might indeed be very good reasons not to disclose, nor will receiving such evidence necessarily prove to be a case winner the documents might not reveal anything useful to SISU. As such it is not about winning or losing for either side tomorrow, its a matter of legal process

Will those documents be in the public domain after tomorrow almost certainly not. The Judge, if so minded, will make an order to disclose within a time period the documents will not become public until read out in Court (ie at the JR).

That's my understanding anyway. I wouldn't get too excited over what happens tomorrow

Spot on there. You explained it very well .. Having been through this myself a couple of times, just because they requesting an order for the minutes documents does not mean they will find anything that will help there case. The fact that there may be irrelevant confidential information in that minutes which they feel SISU and the courts have no legal right knowing due to it having nothing to do with the case may be the reason why the CCC are withholding it but then again SISU may have a good enough argument to convince the judge otherwise.

Will be interesting to see the outcome of this today.

RPHunt · May 13, 2014

I understand that SISU are looking for proof that the council paid for the SISU OUT balloon stuck by PWKH under Fisher’s windscreen wiper.

That’s all this has ever been about – SISU want to show there was a conspiracy to belittle Fisher (by comparing him to a half deflated balloon) and see the JR as the only way to get the proof.

TheRoyalScam · May 13, 2014

@SimonGilbert - a question:

Were you 'tipped off' by either party (and if so by which one), or did you pick up this information via the court schedule?

The reason I'm asking is that if you were 'tipped off' then why did they want it made public? Is it just PR? This has been tried before by SISU - what makes them think they'll succeed when it was thrown out months ago? What's changed in the meantime?

Will you be reporting on proceedings?

Thanks Simon

Grendel · May 13, 2014

TheRoyalScam said:
@SimonGilbert - a question:

Were you 'tipped off' by either party (and if so by which one), or did you pick up this information via the court schedule?

The reason I'm asking is that if you were 'tipped off' then why did they want it made public? Is it just PR? This has been tried before by SISU - what makes them think they'll succeed when it was thrown out months ago? What's changed in the meantime?

Will you be reporting on proceedings?

Thanks Simon

Wonder who tipped the Obsever off that the sponsors had signed a 10 year deal when they hadn't.

fernandopartridge · May 13, 2014

diggerdaley said:
Can CCC see sisu's documents relating to their mishandling of the situation ? I thought not...

No. The case is about state aid. End of.

Gint11 · May 13, 2014

Roll on the JR and get this over with. My word this saga is energy sapping.

Astute · May 13, 2014

fernandopartridge said:
No. The case is about state aid. End of.

But do you really think that SISU will keep everything that they say to whether state aid was lawfully used or not?

RegTheDonk · May 13, 2014

I know why SISU are pursing this, but (and don't think I'm trying to be a prick) WHY is it SISU purusing this?

If its unlawful use of state aid, should not a state department like the Home Office be looking into it? The actual people who gave them the state aid?

I relise it has scuppered SISU's plan of getting a knock down price - and I also realise there is an arguement that CCC paid over the odds for the YB mortgage. But if there was no legal right to sell to SISU, then why should it have anything to do with them. It didn't affect any agreement between SISU and the stadium, after all, they were paying rent, not paying towards the morgage.

If you gave someone the money to go and buy a car, and they blew he lot on booze and birds, who should be getting anoyed and want the money back - you for lending it, or Honest John down the 2nd hand car lot?

No future with SISU · May 13, 2014

Grendel said:
They'll do it immediately I'm sure.

Will you be upset if that paperwork was never there.

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2014

Can we start a sweep stake on how many people will be in the Sisu legal team. I'm going for 9, I think they'll be taking this one more serious than the Higgs case.

torchomatic · May 13, 2014

Probably got it from one of those "in the know" on here. There are lots of them.

Grendel said:
Wonder who tipped the Obsever off that the sponsors had signed a 10 year deal when they hadn't.

RegTheDonk · May 13, 2014

skybluetony176 said:
Can we start a sweep stake on how many people will be in the Sisu legal team. I'm going for 9, I think they'll be taking this one more serious than the Higgs case.

Dunno about their team Tony, but I reckon they'll have a few on the bench

sky blue john · May 13, 2014

Grendel said:
Wonder who tipped the Obsever off that the sponsors had signed a 10 year deal when they hadn't.

Lol !!!
Sisu's attempts to devalue the stadium and Acl and you keep highlighting a fact that makes it worth more !!

Astute · May 13, 2014

RegTheDonk said:
I know why SISU are pursing this, but (and don't think I'm trying to be a prick) WHY is it SISU purusing this?

If its unlawful use of state aid, should not a state department like the Home Office be looking into it? The actual people who gave them the state aid?

I relise it has scuppered SISU's plan of getting a knock down price - and I also realise there is an arguement that CCC paid over the odds for the YB mortgage. But if there was no legal right to sell to SISU, then why should it have anything to do with them. It didn't affect any agreement between SISU and the stadium, after all, they were paying rent, not paying towards the morgage.

If you gave someone the money to go and buy a car, and they blew he lot on booze and birds, who should be getting anoyed and want the money back - you for lending it, or Honest John down the 2nd hand car lot?

Because it wrecked Joys plan to make money for her investors.

torchomatic · May 13, 2014

No, a bit closer to home. LOL, etc etc

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/40504-Ricoh?highlight=ricoh+2025

sky blue john said:
Lol !!!
Sisu's attempts to devalue the stadium and Acl and you keep highlighting a fact that makes it worth more !!

TurkeyTrot · May 13, 2014

RPHunt said:
I understand that SISU are looking for proof that the council paid for the SISU OUT balloon stuck by PWKH under Fisher’s windscreen wiper.

That’s all this has ever been about – SISU want to show there was a conspiracy to belittle Fisher (by comparing him to a half deflated balloon) and see the JR as the only way to get the proof.

They could save themselves a lot of time and money and ask a few Cov fans. Most of us know who paid for the balloons

Sky Blue Dal · May 13, 2014

Not sure if this has been posted here before but please accept my apologise if it has.

below is the link of the State Aid Guidance

https://www.gov.uk/state-aid

In case anyone are interested while we on the topic.

Spionkop · May 13, 2014

So, the Higgs case costs and now this one. Conservative estimate on all the costs to Sisu? £150,000/£200,000?
Bang goes that new striker for next season.
The playing side of the club (never mind us fans) must despair at Sisu.
A good club being wrecked.
Pressley must be looking at other jobs. Brighton maybe?

sky blue john · May 13, 2014

torchomatic said:
No, a bit closer to home. LOL, etc etc

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/40504-Ricoh?highlight=ricoh+2025

Lol
Wow and now you've highlighted another good earner Rugby 2015 World cup matches at the Ricoh !!!

Council and Sky Blues in court tomorrow (1 Viewer)

Telegraph Tea Boy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency