Lucas Paqueta investigated by FA for alleged betting breaches

SebastianBlue said:
That’s why I said “may be seized” in the analogy.

My version is much more accurate to the situation. This is not a case of caveat emptor, as that only covers information that can be reasonably gathered by the buyer (that would not include closed, protected investigations that only the seller is privy to).

Even if it is *just* an investigation, knowing about it and negotiating a deal without disclosure would still be grounds for breach of terms of the contracted deal and would certainly open up West Ham to civil litigation.

It would be considered bad faith negotiation based on withholding privileged information critical to the overall valuation of the transaction (the asset being sold—player’s registration rights—could fall to literally £0 with even a tentative suspension pending outcome of investigation).

This is similar to selling a house that you know has potentially serious structural damage that cannot be discovered by lawfully allowable pre-purchase survey (i.e. the only way to find out is by owning it and doing costly, invasive inspection).
Click to expand...
Well done - I think you may have persuaded Dribble his heroic defence of the indefensible needs to be abandoned ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.