Fair points raised.I believe we went to court to try and keep the charges out of the media and for everything to take place behind closed doors, only to be revealed after the case had been concluded.
Seems fair enough to me, just imagine a situation where were were charged with 115 breaches and it was just thrown out to the media without them having any understanding of the charges. Opposition fans, the media and red tops would have us guilty before the case had ever been heard :)
By doing this the government have totally pissed off Lloyds Bank as well as our owner. The Barclays owe Lloyds 1.2 billion and with the Redbird IMI deal they get the lot. If that is blocked they are looking at 600 mill maximum and they have already written off around 600 mill so that is a huge extra profit lost.Real interesting side story this and one to keep an eye on.
Govt interfering in a private sale in my uneducated view, I am sure there must be more in it.
I can understand why the Govt may not want it being owned in this way.
I disagree on the football side, as I don’t see a massive downside to the Govt in it, whereas with Telegraph it is more a stick potentially used to beat them.
If we asked Govt to have a word with PL (which Boris would have been better then Rishi for us) then so be it, but I don’t think it will be something we will have done.
I would not be totally surprised if someone of their own back in Govt reminded PL they need to be 100% certain to do this and be able to prove it. However I also think the Govt might think there not are relationships when this happens let Labour deal with any fallout.
The Telegraph is reporting that the government has issued a PIIN (Public Interest Intervention Notice) that will block the Redbird IMI backed buy back of the Telegraph by the Barclay family. This will trigger investigations by both Ofcom and the CMA to decide if it should be totally blocked or conditions be put in place before it is allowed.
The money for this buy back is almost exclusively coming from IMI, which is owned by Sheikh Mansour, and this is basically why they have done it. So a couple of days after Khaldoon was being courted by Jeremy Hunt for inward investment they are now effectively saying AD money isn't wanted for the Telegraph sale. The notion that the government will be leaning on the PL in support of our case looks a lot more like wishful thinking. They will pick and choose, so investment in Sizewell is deemed good but for other things it isn't wanted.
Real interesting side story this and one to keep an eye on.
Govt interfering in a private sale in my uneducated view, I am sure there must be more in it.
I can understand why the Govt may not want it being owned in this way.
I disagree on the football side, as I don’t see a massive downside to the Govt in it, whereas with Telegraph it is more a stick potentially used to beat them.
If we asked Govt to have a word with PL (which Boris would have been better then Rishi for us) then so be it, but I don’t think it will be something we will have done.
I would not be totally surprised if someone of their own back in Govt reminded PL they need to be 100% certain to do this and be able to prove it. However I also think the Govt might think there not are relationships when this happens let Labour deal with any fallout.
The limitation is from when the charges are raised. So that's six years before February 2023, so they can charge us for any breaches after February 2017. This doesn't change depending on when the case is heard.Would 2024 means the UK limitation period becomes applicable, in terms of six years or something like that?
not bothered one bit if accused of getting off on technicality, it will boil the piss even more, the villian is disliked by many but also loved by many moreThe limitation is from when the charges are raised. So that's six years before February 2023, so they can charge us for any breaches after February 2017. This doesn't change depending on when the case is heard.
They have charged us much further back than 2017 though, which means the PL thinks it isn't subject to limitation. This will be because the PL rules do not mention limitation, whereas UEFA's own rules impose a five year limitation period on themselves.
The PL rules are made under English law though, so City will argue that a six year limitation should apply under the terms of The Limitation Act 1980. If the commission accepts this argument, all charges before 2017 will need to be dropped, and we will forever be accused of getting off on a technicality.
This, it's not referred to as the torygraph without reason.The government’s intervention into the Telegraph sale is largely politically motivated…. The Telegraph is a loyal mouthpiece for the Tory’s which they are loathed to lose.