The crux of the CAT case is that St James Holdings argument appears to be that the ODT Is anti-competitive because despite what the PL says, it is subjective. Commercial interests intervene when the test Is whether the owners will treat the club and its history with respect, has the finances to run the club correctly and aren't disqualified under UK law. The argument appears to be that having the PL as owners of the company by virtue of undertakings with each member club and acting as regulator is anti competitive. It is very persuasive argument that many legsl experts agree with.
Anyone on Arb watch camping outside the offices ? I'm camping outside St.James Park and can't be 2 places at once just saying @cans
I enjoy reading the debates and opinions on here, I've spent too much time on twitter where everyone truly believes they know best and if your ideas are different then you need burning at a stake. At least from what I've seen on this forum you lot will explain your reasoning the best you can for why you feel or think a certain way, which again is a nice change from the dribble b***cks on twitter
It's a good bunch.. Im definitely the biggest arsehole on here, so I hope you're not after my mantle.
I agree and add to that the mother of all pedestals to preach to the converted or convicted depending on their veiws
Are you telling me my reverse psychology has come up trumps once again? I'll be requiring sufficient evidence to believe that accolade
That's the case number on file. If CAT is going ahead that means arbitration is either this week or potentially happened already/ at the same time.
Nah, was never gonna be causing any bother. I'm not that kinda guy. Live and let live. That's why I told my son to walk away when she started on him.
