Search results

I am sure they have clerks working 24/7. Reminds me of the Khazi of Khalabar: "Dear Lady, I do not make love". "I am extremely rich. I have servants to do everything for me"

They certainly wouldn't go gentle into that good night.

Iirc, it's not simply a question of the time between the hearing and publication, but there would have to be some omissions in the reasoning. In a quickly published judgment that could be attributed to brevity. But the longer the wait, the more it can be argued that the omissions were caused by...

I really like the fact that a random can email these guys about such a sensitive topic and they reply so quickly. Almost restored my faith in lawyers being human. Almost :)

Yes, that was my theory, too ......

There was a reason for that. He had been replaced by Hickinbottom by then :) Try Gary Hickinbottom at (and I am not joking - this is the email given on his chambers website) dubai@39essex.com. Or you could try gary.hickinbottom@39essex.com or, less boldly, his practice manager at...

Amended for you :)

Yes, of course. Unless, of course, there won't be. There may still be room for a settlement - even if our lawyers tell us that isn't possible at this stage. Let's face it, they have been wrong before .....

My latest theory is that if I float enough theories, I am bound to be right with one of them eventually. Then I can convince you all I know what I am talking about :)

Not if it was being appealed and the appeal maybe taken to arbitration. The Chelsea FA case wasn't published until the appeal was finished as we all know. As my other theories sink one by one with the inevitable passage of time (my last one being the PL was waiting for the new "SCR" rule book...

Lawyers don't lie, they say what they want, or are allowed, to say in a way that leaves them wiggle room. This is what Pannick said in his emails to @Paladin: In October 2025: We don't know when the verdict will be delivered or what it will say. We are all waiting. In November 2025: No...

Or do they? Sorry, I'm feeling very philosophical today. Or full of something .....

Yes, I do. Or do I? Nobody has any idea what is going on, really. Or do they?

But is it?

But, have we?

You are saying they are capologists for the press?

Fair enough. I had to re-read it myself :) I was trying to say I think Soriano is a ****, but I don't think he is stupid, and he would have to be stupid to let squad costs get out of control as they are so easily controllable. But, since you started me off again: anybody with a spreadsheet can...

Seriously? And I don't mean that in a derogatory fashion, but do you really believe the people running the club are unknowingly driving straight over a cliff and really don't have the thing completely under control? It would be the stupidest thing. And as much as I would like to add the...

Naah. They re-assess their position. Which to a layman, of course, means they were wrong initially.

Lawyers are never wrong. Although, sometimes they aren't right .....