PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

projectriver said:
Of course, but this video was 2 weeks ago and close to the bone. I’d suggest if even that isn’t deleted then he’s not had any correspondence. And if deletion wasn’t requested then it would undermine any case that the party believed they had been libelled by that video
Click to expand...
Slander rather than libel, surely Stefan?
 
halfcenturyup said:
I don't know, I don't care and I didn't even comment on that.

I merely tried to draw your attention to the fact that the concept of a percentage chance of less than zero doesn't exist, has never existed and will never exist in the real world in this or any other dimension. Unless, I suppose, you are talking quasi-probabilities or quantum mechanics, neither of which really apply to the professional performance of Adam Lewis unless I am very much mistaken.
Click to expand...
I think he meant to post something like a -10% chance ;)
 
projectriver said:
Guessing: I think it is fair to assume the PL took advice from Bird and Bird and the KC on the merits. The precise drafting of the announcement then prepared by the legal dept at the PL and "checked" but missed by the external counsel. Then the case effectively handed over to Bird and Bird and counsel to run vs City. Bird and Bird then referring back for instructions and involvement of PL legal department. If at any point, Counsel thinks the game has changed (say new revelation or evidence) then of course, Counsel speak up. Counsel don't like losing so speak up. The client doesn't always listen or chooses to accept risk say for optics.
Click to expand...
It’s not just about losing. Counsel has a professional duty to update their advice when circumstances materially change, and also need to do so for reasons of indemnity. They shouldn’t even charge for that advice imo, although some unquestionably do.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It’s not just about losing. Counsel has a professional duty to update their advice when circumstances materially change, and also need to do so for reasons of indemnity. They shouldn’t even charge for that advice imo, although some unquestionably do.
Click to expand...
Agreed but its a common misconception they just want to take the money, say, for the full trial.
 
I would be extremely, but pleasantly, surprised if the charges were dismissed or dropped at this stage. The premier league will have been under intense pressure to bring the charges and letting them fall away would cause them even more issues. Far better for them to hear the case so if they lose they can at least say to disgruntled clubs well we tried.

The only thing that is a little surprising is how long it is taking to confirm a date for the hearing. The longer that takes the more intriguing the possibility that something is happening behind the scenes.
 
Tb1981 said:
It’s amazing how one piece of info comes out about a few possible letters to journalists and all of a sudden all this other ‘bullshit’ comes out
My mate said…
I heard…
People then start going with it like it’s gospel
It’s all a load of shite much as I wish it was true
Click to expand...

Probably, but do you think there has been a definite change in mood music this last month or so?
 
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.