City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

Thanks Vic but it says….

“that the APT Rules are unlawful on account of being in breach of sections 2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 because they exclude from their scope shareholder loans and for no other reason;”

That says to me that if the shareholder loans area is corrected then it becomes lawful as they state that is the only reason?
I'm having a go at answering the question, "Why do City say the Rules are void?"

Because that's what the law says. If the Rules are unlawful (for whatever reason) they are prohibited rules and any agreement, or decision of an association, including the prohibited Rules is thus void. [Competition Act 1988, s.2(4)]
 
I am now only a 100 pages behind - more seem to get added faster than I can read.

I have spotted a trend emerging though - that more and more people are getting on @slbsn case.

Fucking hell there is no winning for the fella;-)

By time I get up to 1300 I am fully expecting discussions about Stefan as if it was a matchday thread - perhaps a few - FFS Stefan posts thrown in

I think there a only a few but they have been vocal.
 
One lesson for us going forward is that if Masters and his cartel conspirators suggest another binding arbitration process instead of formal legal proceedings, we tell them to shove it. There is little point in an arbitration procedure if the losers misrepresent the result and fail to act in accordance with it.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.