Your sueing again though. What does that say about the first lawsuit if you're going again? Why will this time be different. Why do you need to due again on the same event?The PL rules and regulations have to comply with UK law, City believe the new APT rules do not and are seeking a verdict from the independent panel. What's the problem?
When the rules are legal under actual law.It a 20 team league. The rules have been voted for by a super majority of 14. I don't understand how the league can function if every club took it upon themselves to sue if they were one of the 6 whose vote went the rong way.
Where does it end?
The first one found 7 areas where the PL either had rules that were unlawful or had acted unreasonably towards City. The PL decided to change the rules without waiting for the Panel to issue the second part of their judgment. City warned Masters that if he did that they were likely to make another challenge and here we are.Your sueing again though. What does that say about the first lawsuit if you're going again? Why will this time be different. Why do you need to due again on the same event?
They changed the rules again though so everything they do change city will sue again if they don't agree with them changes .So not hard to work out.Your sueing again though. What does that say about the first lawsuit if you're going again? Why will this time be different. Why do you need to due again on the same event?
and the PL tighten those rules. I guess we will have to wait until the results then.The first one found 7 areas where the PL either had rules that were unlawful or had acted unreasonably towards City. The PL decided to change the rules without waiting for the Panel to issue the second part of their judgment. City warned Masters that if he did that they were likely to make another challenge and here we are.
It a 20 team league. The rules have been voted for by a super majority of 14. I don't understand how the league can function if every club took it upon themselves to sue if they were one of the 6 whose vote went the rong way.
Where does it end?
It is arbitration not litigation.Your sueing again though. What does that say about the first lawsuit if you're going again? Why will this time be different. Why do you need to due again on the same event?
They don't give reasons and just blackball in secret. How it used to be anyway.That’s because you are a thick ****!
A golf club asks members if a black man should be refused membership on the basis of his colour, the members vote overwhelmingly to refuse membership. Thankfully we have laws that makes this unlawful.
ignore the insult but really read this answer,It a 20 team league. The rules have been voted for by a super majority of 14. I don't understand how the league can function if every club took it upon themselves to sue if they were one of the 6 whose vote went the rong way.
Where does it end?
That’s because you are a thick ****!
A golf club asks members if a black man should be refused membership on the basis of his colour, the members vote overwhelmingly to refuse membership. Thankfully we have laws that makes this unlawful.
ignore the insult but really read this answer,
Stefan giving his take...
Because the panel who ruled in our favour and confirmed the rules were illegal, said they didn't have the authority to rule on whether the entire set needed throwing away or if they passed the blue pencil test. So the PL ignored them and City sued again.Your sueing again though. What does that say about the first lawsuit if you're going again? Why will this time be different. Why do you need to due again on the same event?
I don't think you have even bothered to read up on the initial ruling and the subsequent ammendments by the pl otherwise you would know the answer to this.Your sueing again though. What does that say about the first lawsuit if you're going again? Why will this time be different. Why do you need to due again on the same event?
Naah. He should ignore the answer and read the insult. After nearly 2000 pages of discussion, he clearly has no fucking idea what's going on other than the bollocks he reads anywhere else. I would say thick **** was being charitable.
I must say I am struggling with this narrative that the club are involved in some top level Berting with the PL over this new action. Maybe I am being naive and the club has finally snapped, but, personally, I think this has to be part of a bigger strategy that we just aren't able to determine from out here.
Otherwise, it seems to me we asked the greatest legal mind in English legal history for advice and got a sponge bag in response. Struggling with that, tbh.
Rong spelt like that, oh the ironyIt a 20 team league. The rules have been voted for by a super majority of 14. I don't understand how the league can function if every club took it upon themselves to sue if they were one of the 6 whose vote went the rong way.
Where does it end?
When the laws which they vote on are lawful.It a 20 team league. The rules have been voted for by a super majority of 14. I don't understand how the league can function if every club took it upon themselves to sue if they were one of the 6 whose vote went the rong way.
Where does it end?
We used to think you were stupid. You have just confirmed it (being as polite as I can).It a 20 team league. The rules have been voted for by a super majority of 14. I don't understand how the league can function if every club took it upon themselves to sue if they were one of the 6 whose vote went the rong way.
Where does it end?
Because the panel who ruled in our favour and confirmed the rules were illegal, said they didn't have the authority to rule on whether the entire set needed throwing away or if they passed the blue pencil test. So the PL ignored them and City sued again.
You could have at least tried to read up on this before coming on here asking stupid fucking questions with your shit and snide accusations
No, if anything consequence,You’ve confused importance with likelihood of the worst possible outcome.