No, it was a one day thing to hear the PL argument that the CAT had no jurisdiction over them as A) they are self governed and B) Arbitration is dealing with it. Decision on weather the case can proceed will be made in the next week to 10 days I would guess. At that point case management would start and a CAT hearing will be made in the future. Both PL QC and SJH QC stated it would make sense to hold the CAT after Arbitration which is due to be held on 03/01/2022. However the 3rd is a bank holiday so will be the 4th and expected to last a week. The PL QC stated that if Arbitration finds KSA doesn't need to be named director at that time the deal would be completed there and then. Intimating that the there was no issues with the O&D tests for those already done. He went on to say that this would leave them plenty of room and time to operate in the winter transfer window. PL QC hopes for a stay of hearing - meaning nothing is done till after Arbitration. STJH QC wants the CAT to be put in place now with a date set after the Arbitration. This method would allow NUFC to be armed with the disclosure evidence in the Arbitration hearing.
I do have some concern that we all heard what we wanted to hear. It's easy to dismiss arguments that you don't emotionally accept
The PL have best part of **** all. It's clear after yesterday that their plan was always to delay and hope it all goes away.
I hate to disagree with you my learned friend but after yesterday I feel ready to sit at the bar, wearing a grey wig and throwing a hammer about.
That's my reading too, but what I said is true. The human brain instinctively makes its decision based on emotional responses and then 'after' seeks evidence to justify the decision. I'm highlighting a scientific reason why all nufc fans think its nailed on to go our way. The other guys no slouch and I suspect their case is better than we think.
For example if a Sunderland fans watched that they'd be saying the premier leagues case is rock solid.
Okay trying to take the black and white tinted specs off. If I remember correctly the PL QC argument for having it thrown out was that Mike Ashley in his capacity as owner still owns the asset and could still sell said asset to another party and that there had been no losses incurred other than legal costs. The Chairman of the panel then specifically intervened and said "If I have a product and wish to sell the product but am prevented from doing so by a 3rd party then I am of course financially worse off as I have not had access to these funds" Adam Lewis then agreed this point and then appeared to have the Case delayed till after Arbitration to see if there was any sort of financial loss to Mike Ashley.
You can be the best chef in the world but if you don’t have the Ingredients you can’t cook something special.
There are two parts to the financial loss. One of which cannot be quantified and actually can’t fall under the claim but it was referred too. That is the investment financial loss the club has suffered. Ashley has suffered a loss because he cannot get access to the cash offered. He also now cannot sell at the same value. The loss is what was offered less market value when the decision was made. That is to say the value someone is prepared to pay (MV is subjective). The interest element I’m not going into. There is even an argument to say that the loss is actually increased due to the PL decision. Why would anyone try to buy the club when they know the PL won’t accept.
Good enough, and thanks for the overnight musings on the quotes - was in line with my hopes for the CAT strategy …. roll on hearing a decision quickly
The only argument the PL have is the technicalities of the SJHL owning the club and being bound by the same rules of the FA and PL. The unsigned document (kicking us out of the PL) suggests that we are safe for CAT. I would argue that the possibility of CAT agreeing with the two cases being one and the same are slim given the final comments suggested by the Judge. When they all laughed at PL dude about not being able to prepare for two cases at the same time. In some respects that is comical in itself. The PL are arguing the cases are one and then same. But then on the other hand are suggesting they don’t have time to do both cases. The Judge took the piss out of him on that point!
