|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 9:31:50 GMT
Post by Severncider on Jul 30, 2015 9:31:50 GMT
Not really worth risking the clubs future over a few mill . The uwe isn't going to happen weather we win or not . Very irresponsible of Higgs and co to gamble in this way . I posted this in another thread... I've been reliably informed, that any legal costs incurred from the appeal are being waived.
Shamesburys cannot appeal against the outcome of the appeal, so if its not costing us anything we would have been daft not to have appealed.
Are you sure about that?
If we had won the original case it would not have surprised me if Sainsbury did not appeal the decision. I cannot see the difference between BRFC wining the original decision and winning an appeal.
I hope you are right.
As regards the appeal costs being waived, waived by who? It can only be by our legal team and I have not heard that the appeal is on a "no win no fee".
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 11:16:35 GMT
Post by LJG on Jul 30, 2015 11:16:35 GMT
Not really worth risking the clubs future over a few mill . The uwe isn't going to happen weather we win or not . Very irresponsible of Higgs and co to gamble in this way . I posted this in another thread... I've been reliably informed, that any legal costs incurred from the appeal are being waived.
Shamesburys cannot appeal against the outcome of the appeal, so if its not costing us anything we would have been daft not to have appealed.
Eh? How'd you figure that out? Of course they can if they have leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 11:37:19 GMT
Post by Topper Gas on Jul 30, 2015 11:37:19 GMT
Has roverstillidie got Part 2 of his post wrong I guess Part 1 is probably wrong as well, but can anybody honestly see a firm of solicitors and their barrister working for free?? If they did wouldn't that almost be an admission of guilt that they b@lls up checking the contract?
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 11:40:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by baggins on Jul 30, 2015 11:40:44 GMT
Anybody else completely confused? Our appeal is to get our court case expenses back? To get the full £30 mil? To improve the pasty selection?
What's going on?
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 11:59:09 GMT
Post by Severncider on Jul 30, 2015 11:59:09 GMT
Anybody else completely confused? Our appeal is to get our court case expenses back? To get the full £30 mil? To improve the pasty selection? What's going on? As I see it, I could well be wrong, we are seeking leave to appeal the decision in Sainsbury's favour.
The original decision was that Sainsbury were able to get out of the original Contract to pay us £28m. So as I see it, we believe that the decision should have gone in our favour and Sainsbury had to pay us £28m.
So I cannot see how we are just appealing the costs of defending Sainsbury's appeal and/or the increased cost of building the stadium, we must surely be asking for the full £28m.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:02:30 GMT
Post by LJG on Jul 30, 2015 12:02:30 GMT
Has roverstillidie got Part 2 of his post wrong I guess Part 1 is probably wrong as well, but can anybody honestly see a firm of solicitors and their barrister working for free?? If they did wouldn't that almost be an admission of guilt that they b@lls up checking the contract? Counsel (the barrister) almost certainly won't be free but I have heard fairly reliably that because the issue came from Burgess Salmon drafting it looks a bit embarrassing for them and as such they're giving us a favourable rate on fees - I doubt that means free.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:03:30 GMT
via mobile
Post by baggins on Jul 30, 2015 12:03:30 GMT
Anybody else completely confused? Our appeal is to get our court case expenses back? To get the full £30 mil? To improve the pasty selection? What's going on? As I see it, I could well be wrong, we are seeking leave to appeal the decision in Sainsbury's favour.
The original decision was that Sainsbury were able to get out of the original Contract to pay us £28m. So as I see it, we believe that the decision should have gone in our favour and Sainsbury had to pay us £28m.
So I cannot see how we are just appealing the costs of defending Sainsbury's appeal and/or the increased cost of building the stadium, we must surely be asking for the full £28m.
Well I would certainly hope that we're appealing the decision in order to get Sainsburys to pay up the full promised amount.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:04:09 GMT
Post by xplosivgas on Jul 30, 2015 12:04:09 GMT
Anybody else completely confused? Our appeal is to get our court case expenses back? To get the full £30 mil? To improve the pasty selection? What's going on? The appeal can surely only relate to the judge's ruling that Sainsburys is able to walk away from the contract, and a successful appeal would result in reversing that decision. The case wasn't about the issue of compensation, so I can't see how the appeal can relate to that in any way.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:04:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by baggins on Jul 30, 2015 12:04:44 GMT
Has roverstillidie got Part 2 of his post wrong I guess Part 1 is probably wrong as well, but can anybody honestly see a firm of solicitors and their barrister working for free?? If they did wouldn't that almost be an admission of guilt that they b@lls up checking the contract? Counsel (the barrister) almost certainly won't be free but I have heard fairly reliably that because the issue came from Burgess Salmon drafting it looks a bit embarrassing for them and as such they're giving us a favourable rate on fees - I doubt that means free. And our appeal is for the full amount?
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:05:16 GMT
Post by thegasman on Jul 30, 2015 12:05:16 GMT
The clue is in the name "Leave to appeal" we are asking if we are allowed to appeal, if granted an appeal will be launched to overturn the original decision. My thoughts are the best we can expect from an appeal (if leave is granted) is to ask for Rovers costs to be covered.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:09:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by baggins on Jul 30, 2015 12:09:08 GMT
The clue is in the name "Leave to appeal" we are asking if we are allowed to appeal, if granted an appeal will be launched to overturn the original decision. My thoughts are the best we can expect from an appeal (if leave is granted) is to ask for Rovers costs to be covered. So we're asking for the chance to over rule the original decision and seek the full amount of £30 mil?
|
|
|
Post by thegasman on Jul 30, 2015 12:14:32 GMT
As we didn't bring the original court case I don't think we are able to ask for the full contract amount. I may be wrong.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 12:40:18 GMT
Post by thegasman on Jul 30, 2015 12:40:18 GMT
If leave to appeal is granted: this from the Royal Courts of Justice:
(2) The appeal court has power to –
(a) affirm, set aside or vary any order or judgment made or given by the lower court;
(b) refer any claim or issue for determination by the lower court;
(c) order a new trial or hearing;
(d) make orders for the payment of interest;
(e) make a costs order.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 15:06:55 GMT
Post by LJG on Jul 30, 2015 15:06:55 GMT
Counsel (the barrister) almost certainly won't be free but I have heard fairly reliably that because the issue came from Burgess Salmon drafting it looks a bit embarrassing for them and as such they're giving us a favourable rate on fees - I doubt that means free. And our appeal is for the full amount? Or enforcement of the contract, yes. We're appealing to overturn the original decision.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 30, 2015 17:05:36 GMT
via mobile
Post by roverstillidie on Jul 30, 2015 17:05:36 GMT
Has roverstillidie got Part 2 of his post wrong I guess Part 1 is probably wrong as well, but can anybody honestly see a firm of solicitors and their barrister working for free?? If they did wouldn't that almost be an admission of guilt that they b@lls up checking the contract? Just passing on what I've been told guys..don't shoot the messenger Regarding Sainsburys appealing against our appeal if we were to Win. Surely there comes a point where one cannot appeal against the verdict.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jul 30, 2015 17:18:36 GMT
Well the final decision could rest with the European Courts if one party wished to take it that far!
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 31, 2015 10:28:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by baggins on Jul 31, 2015 10:28:17 GMT
So what are the chances of us hearing a verdict some time today?
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 31, 2015 10:30:01 GMT
Post by roverstillidie on Jul 31, 2015 10:30:01 GMT
Well the final decision could rest with the European Courts if one party wished to take it that far! Unlikely I would have thought.
|
|
|
Appeal
Jul 31, 2015 10:59:54 GMT
Post by LJG on Jul 31, 2015 10:59:54 GMT
Has roverstillidie got Part 2 of his post wrong I guess Part 1 is probably wrong as well, but can anybody honestly see a firm of solicitors and their barrister working for free?? If they did wouldn't that almost be an admission of guilt that they b@lls up checking the contract? Just passing on what I've been told guys..don't shoot the messenger Regarding Sainsburys appealing against our appeal if we were to Win. Surely there comes a point where one cannot appeal against the verdict. Yes there does - after a Supreme Court ruling. We're appealing to the Court of Appeal if we get leave and Sainsbury's will appeal that decision to the Supreme Court if they get leave. As someone else said it could go then to the Court of Justice of the European Union but I think those issues have to have been raised at the court of first instance (High Court) stage and cannot be then introduced at the appeal stages so I'm not sure whether it's possible in this case or not. I've made this appeal to others on here before I'm sure I'll make it again: Please don't state as fact something which you don't know to be a fact. For some reason people like to say "I don't know much about ..." and then state as fact just something that they reckon, not what they know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2015 15:00:45 GMT
As we didn't bring the original court case I don't think we are able to ask for the full contract amount. I may be wrong.
You are theclub are appealing against the decision by the judge that JS were allowed to walk away from the contract.If the appeal is successful then inless the appeal court judges allow a further appeal then JS have to honour the contract.From what I can gather one aspect is that the judge did not take the time used up by the JR into consideration,this was an unforeseen problem and not covered in the original contract and accoerding to a barrister I know this is a major factor and will probably swing the case in Rovers favour,he also said it is unlikely that any further appeals will be allowed.If the club win the appeal they are then entitled to take JS to court to reclaim all costs
|
|