covcity4life
Well-Known Member
not sure other commitments are allowed mate when it comes to travelling to brum lol
not sure other commitments are allowed mate when it comes to travelling to brum lolThere is no court action, it's a complaint to the EC, just like if you were to put in a complaint to the financial ombudsman about insurance dispute. We all think they should have halted it after the last defeat.
Who says I'm not bothered? I'd prefer us to be at the Ricoh but with Brums pitch, I've only managed to get to 4-5 games due to other commitments. I wouldnt have missed a game at the ricoh.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
I would think the 6,000 extra supporters who would go to the Ricoh wouldn't give a toss about the laughable preferences of half a dozen people on this site who want to stay in Birmingham.
Yes if the regulations in place at the time were breached.Will it still go to the EC ? Boris has said after January 31st EU rules don’t exist.
Did you sing The Hills are Alive with the Sound of Music, or Climb Every Mountain with Your Favourite Things singing Edelweiss?Ironically the current bad deal for the operating company came about following a complaint to the EC about the original plan to sell the stadium to West Ham
The operators were forced to lease it instead and as WHU were the only realistic bidders Karren Brady was able to play hard ball
I suspect the operating company will eventually go bust
There are a lot of similarities with our situation which is why I think Wasps and the council are terrified of it going to the EC
West Ham had to move out of Upton Park. It had become a dump and the transport connections were appalling
I doubt that, after January 31st the EU have no jurisdiction at all on British law according to our Boris, so what would happen if Wasps and/or Council tell the EU to do one.Yes if the regulations in place at the time were breached.
And if I’m wrong, wasps will be able to drop the indemnity requirement, won’t they?For things happening after 31 Jan maybe EU will have no jurisdiction, but will for things happening before that date.
The only way that is likely to be the case is if we crash out with no deal and no intention of making a deal at any point in the future.I doubt that, after January 31st the EU have no jurisdiction at all on British law according to our Boris, so what would happen if Wasps and/or Council tell the EU to do one.
Not according to Boris, he’s clearly said all EU regulations cease January 31st and we all know he doesn’t tell lies.
Not according to Boris, he’s clearly said all EU regulations cease January 31st and we all know he doesn’t tell lies.
Wouldn’t that still effectively rule any action out? From what was said when all this came to light, first the EU have to decide if the proposition of unfair state aid has merit, then, if they decide that it does, the legal mechanism would start to trundle. I thought even the first of these things could take two or three years so in effect haven’t they already been timed out if Johnson sticks to his December deadline?We carry on until the December transition date
From Linklaters legal firm websiteWouldn’t that still effectively rule any action out? From what was said when all this came to light, first the EU have to decide if the proposition of unfair state aid has merit, then, if they decide that it does, the legal mechanism would start to trundle. I thought even the first of these things could take two or three years so in effect haven’t they already been timed out if Johnson sticks to his December deadline?
If this is true, it may be a boost to Wasps but I would still take it as Sisu would have had one more legal avenue closed down and presumably we would be closer to the end game. (Can they still bring a civil case?).
PS Sorry Magwitch, your mates aren’t off the hook.From Linklaters legal firm website
Jurisdiction over “live” cases during the transition period
The Commission will continue to have jurisdiction over antitrust and merger cases “initiated” before the end of the transition period. In relation to state aid proceedings, the Commission will be competent to initiate (and later determine) new proceedings in respect of aid granted before the end of the transition period, for a period of four years after the end of the transition period.
Binding nature of decisions
Decisions adopted by the Commission or the EU Courts before the end of the transition period, or after the transition period as set out above, and addressed to the UK or to natural or legal persons residing in the UK, shall be binding on and in the UK. The legality of such a decision shall be reviewed exclusively by the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”).
Monitoring and enforcement of commitments and remedies
Unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the CMA, the Commission will continue to be competent to monitor and enforce commitments given or remedies imposed in, or in relation to, the UK in connection with competition or merger proceedings unless the Commission and the CMA agree otherwise.
QED
It’s a fugazi mateJust out of interest who has the most debt, Wasps or CCFC
Mates ?
Wouldn’t that still effectively rule any action out? From what was said when all this came to light, first the EU have to decide if the proposition of unfair state aid has merit, then, if they decide that it does, the legal mechanism would start to trundle. I thought even the first of these things could take two or three years so in effect haven’t they already been timed out if Johnson sticks to his December deadline?
If this is true, it may be a boost to Wasps but I would still take it as Sisu would have had one more legal avenue closed down and presumably we would be closer to the end game. (Can they still bring a civil case?).
FFS Not you as well?? It is NOT SISU's case to win. They made a complaint to the European Commission. If THEY (and they alone) decide that the Treaty on State Aid has been breached, they will ask the UK courts to act to seek recompense to the state.I don't see SISU winning the case. It's been thrown out of British courts numerous times. It's just a delaying tactics to see if Wasps go pop in my opinion. Just out of interest who has the most debt, Wasps or CCFC???
And that would achieve what exactly? The hope that Wasps have to pay and they hope they go pop?FFS Not you as well?? It is NOT SISU's case to win. They made a complaint to the European Commission. If THEY (and they alone) decide that the Treaty on State Aid has been breached, they will ask the UK courts to act to seek recompense to the state.
You mean the same courts who at the highest level have thrown the case out.FFS Not you as well?? It is NOT SISU's case to win. They made a complaint to the European Commission. If THEY (and they alone) decide that the Treaty on State Aid has been breached, they will ask the UK courts to act to seek recompense to the state.
You mean the same courts who at the highest level have thrown the case out.
And that would achieve what exactly? The hope that Wasps have to pay and they hope they go pop?
assume ,wasps will head back down South due to having to give the stadium back to CCC and CCC will face a huge fine. CCC will then be faced with an embarrassing loss, coupled with a white elephant stadium.
Their three options then are..
1) to work with SISU and get CCFC back to Cov
2) look elsewhere for another tenant
3) use the land for something else.
I suspect I can guess which one they wouldn't do out of those 3.
Even if they were, they will have been directed by the EU Commission as to how the regulations should be applied. The extract shown in my earlier post suggests EU will have jurisdiction until December 2024 ( given the transition period will close about then) so council not off the hook yet. All depends on EU Commission view post initial investigation and I don’t think the outcome of UK courts so far mean that the outcome can be taken for granted. I guess hence the indemnity requirement.You mean the same courts who at the highest level have thrown the case out.
UnlikelyWell which ever way the EU find the side that loses will mount an appeal and on it goes. If they have jurisdiction until Dec 2024 you can bet we will still be having the debate up until that very day.
And I’ve told you this before - the wage bill was too high. Hence why SISU then took drastic measures to reduce the wage bill. It was at that time relegation to league one occurred and the SISU OUT protests started.
read the whole history of the land purchase, we were completely mugged off, then used as a profit mule for the council.
The £1.3 million was agreed when the council said it was either that and we sell our 50% stake or we’d go into administration .
Something at the time McGinnity at al were loath to do
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?