Why a 'joyous celebration?'
On train home from work overheard Gary Ridley stating that there is genuine concern that the procedural handling of the Woodlands enquiry (which he dismiss fantasy and involving knocking down the school) will be the subject for JR3
There'll be all kinds of avenues.Not saying it’s correct but surely the sort of Avenue the owners will persue if their quest is to take a very long term view of litigation ?
Reading between the lines the concern was that junior planning officials hadn’t followed due processNot saying it’s correct but surely the sort of Avenue the owners will persue if their quest is to take a very long term view of litigation ?
I’d be surprised that they’d let anyone other than the top dog deal with anything sisu put in. They’d be stupid if they haven’tReading between the lines the concern was that junior planning officials hadn’t followed due process
Plus wasps would not be an interested party so they could still deal with usBut what would they get out of appealing that?
They surely wouldn't be looking at the sort of pay outs JR1 and 2 could have yielded if successful?
Tie up CCC and it's arguably their best negotiating position.But what would they get out of appealing that?
They surely wouldn't be looking at the sort of pay outs JR1 and 2 could have yielded if successful?
They’ll be typing up some bollocks this morning no doubt, end of the day they’re pretty much fucked now.No statement as yet from the club or our moronic owners... I'm happy to give the Council/Wasps a hard time but we need to hear from CCFC or SISU now...
Who to? The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, nowhere else for them to go.SISU will surely appeal, they won't stop until there is no option they can chase or they would of stopped ages ago
On train home from work overheard Gary Ridley stating that there is genuine concern that the procedural handling of the Woodlands enquiry (which he dismiss fantasy and involving knocking down the school) will be the subject for JR3
European court is the next step for them still i thinkWho to? The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, nowhere else for them to go.
We should have 100% profits from F&B and parking for when CCFC play, makes total sense to me.From a CCFC point of view I would want no rent rise and full access to the profits on F&B and Car parking - but i don't think that is going to be on the table.
This is a possibility but i do not see what would be gained from it. A judicial review is a review of procedure, and i would guess a successful challenge would result in CCC being asked to re run their procedures in line with proper conduct. There might be some small financial loss that has been caused so far that SISU might have a case for claiming but i doubt it is significant, SISU have already said they have limited their expenditure so far because of lack of response
What such an action does not do is distress Wasps, which in my opinion has been the focus of the latest actions. Such an action would not tie Wasps in to JR3 because it would be about something unrelated to Wasps. So i would think any action if there is to be any would be through the civil courts focusing on how Wasps had attempted to distress CCFC by their actions, had tried to wrest ownership away and the resultant financial loss caused to ARVO & SBS&L - not a massively strong case despite what is said in this forum - but it doesnt have to be because it wraps Wasps up in expensive, costly time consuming legal actions
Wasps could still offer CCFC new terms and include a clause making any deal dependent on an end to legal challenges (past present & future) for their purchase of ACL and the lease. From their point of view I would allow a few days to see what SISU response is then offer a reasonable deal for 5 years on a take it or leave it basis. That would include a rent rise but access to a proportion of the associated match incomes like F&B & Car parking. From a CCFC point of view I would want no rent rise and full access to the profits on F&B and Car parking - but i don't think that is going to be on the table.
How many more times? They have not LOST at the Supreme Court (merely been denied leave to appeal, as there is no arguable point of law of public importance), therefore they cannot go to the ECJ.European court is the next step for them still i think
We should have 100% profits from F&B and parking for when CCFC play, makes total sense to me.
Don't see why not, after all we keep being told the benefit of having CCFC there is minimal so shouldn't be a problem to pass those minimal profits over.From a CCFC point of view I would want no rent rise and full access to the profits on F&B and Car parking - but i don't think that is going to be on the table.
With respect to the last point-could a one off fee be paid in order to access those?
Hopefully be a better offer than when Gidney said we could buy them back for the remainder of the original 50 year lease for something ridiculous like £32mWith respect to the last point-could a one off fee be paid in order to access those?
Hopefully be a better offer than when Gidney said we could buy them back for the remainder of the original 50 year lease for something ridiculous like £32m
How many more times? They have not LOST at the Supreme Court (merely been denied leave to appeal, as there is no arguable point of law of public importance), therefore they cannot go to the ECJ.
That is my understanding - legal experts feel free to correct me.
Bargain! Surprised we didn't sign up.Come on it was only £24 million
With respect to the last point-could a one off fee be paid in order to access those?
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?