Bloominmarvellous
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2023
- Messages
- 53
- Team supported
- Man utd
Oh yes I definitely think the PL think they have a case to answer but who knows if what they think is correct.As Jordan said, there is undeniably case to answer. I hate it when he is right. How the evidence falls on the balance of probabilities depends not just on what the evidence is, but how it is presented and argued. I am comfortable that the club's legal team are competent enough to present what the club calls irrefutable evidence very well, but I am also sure the PL thinks their team is competent enough to challenge it.
If you have been involved in employment cases, I am sure you have experienced situations where one side or the other thinks it's a slam dunk, but something happens to sway the balance the other way?
I guess the PL consider the chance of just coming away with, say, a non-cooperation success far outweighs the damage that would be caused by dropping the case.
As far as slam dunks I don't think I have ever felt that way but on cases you bring you have to be confident and ensure you have the evidence and procedures has been followed to prevent arguments of failure in process. Basically ensuring you have enough to prevent opposition pulling apart your arguments and evidence. If you do not have this confidence or evidence i would say at that point you should not take to a hearing and should record a no case to answer in your investigative report(but that's just my opinion)
Very occasionally new evidence comes to light so you are correct it's never 100%.