Basically looking at ownership and control under uk company law and how the PL are completely ignoring the rules of company law. Basically evidence which may be used in the arbitration case which the PL seem to be irrelevant in their assessment of ownership and directorships.
And RB sports and media ltd is the Rueben Brothers company which will buy 10%. So Nufc will be owned, for the purpose of uk law and ownership and control by. JV1 Ltd- Amanda Stavely and her husband 10% NCUK INV Ltd- PIF 80% - the problem for Arbitration RB sports and media Ltd- Rueben bros 10% All of which is registered under company law.
You would think right. But it’s actually more common than you think. Especially when it comes to legal cases involving lost PAYE to the HMRC. Companies are just vehicles seen as a legal entity but in the legal sense they can also be classed as an object to facilitate other means. But in the case of our arbitration it’s pure conjecture on the PL behalf. They are making the rules up as they go along.
Yup. The test is geared towards denying PIF and then coming up with an excuse after. Except they have not counted on Mike Ashley; a man who doesn't take no for an answer and who has now instructed some of this country's greatest legsl minds.
They are ****ting themselves. I think it has dawned on them that they have seriously ****ed up and they are trying to delay it.
Tbh I said very early on like well before PIFs withdrawal statement that the plan could be to just sit on it and do nothing... The entire plan may have simply been to drag it out from day 1 on everything..
Liam Kennedy.... Kennedy revealed that the club fear because this case will be heard in private, the Premier League might get away with certain things. He said: “The fear was always about the makeup of the panel, we’ve all seen that. Newcastle United desperately tried to get that changed because they saw a clear conflict of interest, that was thrown out. You’ve got to remember that at least one [panel member] was selected by the Premier League. “That’s the biggest fear, that things can be said and done behind closed doors without the public eye and scrutiny that comes with that. “Things can be said and done that wouldn’t be said and done in a public forum. I think that’s the biggest fear about the arbitration. “I don’t necessarily think that Newcastle United have got an unwinnable case there – I think anything but, by the sounds of it. The bits that I hear, they’re very, very confident that, if things go in their favour and go well, that they’ll win that hands down, no problem.”
Something that will no longer wash. The CAT president has refused to give the PL the extension and the arbitration has been expedited. The net is closing.
Exactly what I have been saying. Ashley has effectively said "**** your confidential process. I will take you to CAT and make everything public." The PL respond by trying to stop that. By that act alone they are confirming that they have something to hide. They tried to delay. They are bricking it.
There should be a Police investigation into football corruption. The game in this country is tainted.
Just a very deliberate plan on advice from their legal team. I can picture the scenario when they explain they can't fail it and they say what can we do! They suggest delay! They ask how long can we do that and they reply.. If we play our cards right a year maybe 2. They go for that
Oh I'm sure a televised legal defence of Saudi Arabia will be prime programming for 2021... Mind you, if the Tories manage to flush more cronies into the BBC it's not that unlikely.
Yep. And or they where expecting us to get relegated. Look at the very least we can all relax and enjoying the drama unfold and with the potential of a takeover on the horizon. @Sheikh_of_Araby I’m asking you this one because it’s well last my brain power. If the PL have achieved an extension. And they are wanting the case thrown out..... Is the extension so they can facilitate the reasons for the case to be thrown out, and; When do we find out if the PL are successful in getting the CAT case thrown out? Is there a possibility that the ARB case is concluded before the CAT case is thrown out?
The PL are expected to argue that the case should be thrown out based on concurrent tribunal proceedings under Rule 34 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules. They believe that the dispute before CAT is the same as the one before arbitration. Based on info in the public domain that is nonsense. CAT is about breaches of competition law. Arbitration is separation. Two unrelated matters. We find out around 11th June the PL's response and fairly soon after whether their request has been successful. I suspect it won't be.
