Well it all seems pretty clear to me provided that the ruling is fair and follows the evidence. And not just a case of yada yada yada but I rule in favour of the PL. But the evidence is overwhelming Mr Beloff in favour is separation. I don’t care Nick. I can do what I want and the PL pay very VERY well.
Their registered shell company NCUK Investment Limited - it is the Public Investment Fund of KSA. Registration no: 12415316. PIF are a limited company under UK law. None of the directors are KSA or MBS. It is a legally registered company that has had to comply with the Companies Act.
NCUK Inv ltd is therefore the inv vehicle for the takeover. I get that this is a ref company under company law. But I didn’t realised PIF itself is.
Talking of Fatima. She’s never really been mentioned as doing anything for the arbitration? Wonder why?
She will be the one working on separation. She is one of the worlds leading legal experts on Saudi law.
Page 3 of their confirmation statement. One ordinary share - Public Investment Fund. A UK company registered in law by PIF. If they were the state, that would not comply with the Companies Act.
Ye s PIF owns the company. But itself is not a registered company. Nor does it have to be. This just proves they own ncuk inv ltd. Ncuk inv ltd will own 80% of the shares in nufc.
They do. My point though is this - if PIF are the state then a state cannot be a director nor own a company. Right? Yet they have successfully registered one.
Yes I see where you are going here. PIF are definitely a registered trading entity absolutely: and legally spectate from the state definitely. I guess that is under uk company law. But the PL own rules do not follow company law. It’s a farce I know but they claim that the legal definition is irrelevant. That their own test comes first and then if their own test proves not separate (bullshit I know) then NCUC INV LTD is see-through. That PIF is see-through and they pin the control on KSA or MBS. Completely ignoring the legal framework behind it. That is basically their argument.
Bizarre that he was appointed on 18 December but the filing was 26/04/21. Literally days before the CAT case was filed.
Do you want to go any deeper into the explanation or are you just going to bleed the information out gradually
