PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

halfcenturyup said:
On the facts of the case, presumably?

I seem to remember UEFA and City got a copy of the CAS award, presumably redacted for the actual conclusions, the week before publication?

Maybe I am misremembering, but I always imagined that was why Cheeseman was able to judge the feeling in the club on the Friday before the award was published. A party can presumably get an idea of the way it has gone from how the facts (amount of detail, order of the reasoning and the like) are described?

Maybe this is the same....
Click to expand...
It could be on a point of law especially if the parties have an agreed position on the interpretation of a legal principle or some relevant case law.

Unlikely to be on a finding of fact as that is a matter entirely for the tribunal based on the evidence that has been presented to them and any questions around live evidence can be resolved by playing back the testimony which they will unquestionably be able to do.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It could be on a point of law especially if the parties have an agreed position on the interpretation of a legal principle or some relevant case law.

Unlikely to be on a finding of fact as that is a matter entirely for the tribunal based on the evidence that has been presented to them and any questions around live evidence can be resolved by playing back the testimony which they will unquestionably be able to do.
Click to expand...
It's normal in civil cases for embargoed judgments to be sent to the parties before public release. They get an opportunity to make corrections (only minor ones - typos, incorrect references and the like) and also a small window of time to prepare press lines and the like. That can be a very small window though. The last embargoed judgment where I was on the embargo list was a Court of Appeal case, and I think they only gave us 24 hours notice before it was publicly handed down!

So I'd imagine this is what happened at CAS. City and UEFA will have had draft versions of the full judgment.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
This is a guess, but it’s not unheard of for the parties to have some input into the wording of a judicial determination, once it’s been arrived at, and my guess is that would be more likely to be permissible in this setting than many others.

If any of the limitation points got home I’d be pushing for the wording on that to expressly provide that this isn’t a ‘technicality’ but a core term of the agreement between the parties (I may have mentioned this once or twice before!).
Click to expand...
If my memory serves me in the Everton IC both parties were given a copy of the draft written reasons and both wanted certain passages to be re worded but the IC stuck with the original draft
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It could be on a point of law especially if the parties have an agreed position on the interpretation of a legal principle or some relevant case law.

Unlikely to be on a finding of fact as that is a matter entirely for the tribunal based on the evidence that has been presented to them and any questions around live evidence can be resolved by playing back the testimony which they will unquestionably be able to do.
Click to expand...

It's a whole new world to me. Happy to learn.
 
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.