Kid in the Riot

Eddie Hitler - re Cobbetts perhaps an exceptional example. To add some context to your post Cobbetts went through M&A activity in the years before the recession and had taken on several new offices. It doesn't matter what sector or industry you work in, that could have been a recipe for disaster.

Re Burges Salmon your being far too simplistic. 'We get paid anyway' is way off the mark. What they have 'on the line' is:

- goodwill built up;

- damages - yes, you can sue lawyers and there are lawyers who specialise in suing lawyers;

- enduring relationship with a client who will have other significant concerns - contract law, employment law, commercial issues (sponsorship); Heath and safety, licensing... I could go on.

- winning the trust of executives who may have other business interests. Perhaps someone in the dairy indiustry which has complex EU quotas and regulations, land law, sale of goods, services. Perhaps someone in financial services. Perhaps someone in the construction industry.

To save time rather than suggesting you check, within Bristol City's accounts you'll find Burges Salmon as solicitor. If you look at Hargreaves Lansdown's webpage you will find Burges Salmon as solicitor. Im not recommending Burges Salmon (and if you're wondering no I don't and never have worked there), but they do have a strong reputation. If you wanted to check for yourself there's plenty of online resources rating and ranking lawyers - chambers and partners for one.

And having visited Burges Salmon's offices at Temple Quay several times, it is a lovely building inside and the canteen is spot on!

Rivalry aside if they were floated on the stock market would you regard buying shares in Bristol Rovers or any loss-making fourth division club as a good investment?

 

I wouldn't.

A bought shares in Bristol City a few years back, what a waste of time and money that was...

They're losing money with no prospect of making a profit.

 

They may share this with the majority of clubs outside of the upper reaches of the premiership but it doesn't make them a "decent proposition to onlooking investors".  Possibly somebody might want to buy the ground from the directors for development but the football side is a lemon.

If you say so...

There isn't a shortage of investors lining up to purchase English football clubs last time I checked.

Clearly I'm not saying they're some outstanding investment opportunity but sellable, absolutely.

The role of an instructing solicitor cannot be downplayed. It is a vital cog in the process, especially in complex cases. Barristers do not concern themselves with drafting statements of case, taking witness statements, preparing bundles of evidence for court, negotiations with other sides, getting the procedure in place and lined up - what a monumentally expensive way of doing that for starters. They (Barristers) don't even really have anything to do with the legal arguments until a solicitor writes up their opinion, their interpretation of the law, their interpretation of the precedents and instructs counsel to opine on those and perhaps advocate. Of course the Barrister will give their 'meaty' advice but the suggestion that it's their case and the instructing solicitor is merely a conduit between a barrister and the client is about as watertight as Rovers' contract seemingly is.

 

I've no doubts BCL who is embarking on a career at the Bar will be very quick to defend the vital role instructing solicitors will play in practice.  

Sorry I could've saved you some time...I am well aware of the above. What I was getting at was people casting aspersions on Burges Salmon giving out the legal advice whereas ultimately it would have been the barrister they would've had a con with who'd have ultimately dished out the "meaty" legal advice ie as to whether an appeal was worth pursuing and if it was what kind of chance they have of winning.

Would plan b more attractive to their fans going forwards? Ie potential investors who would bankroll the club?

Despite how much we lament them and however bleak the outlook may look from the outside, they'd clearly be a decent proposition to onlooking investors. I don't think Higgs is telling fibs when he says he's had plenty of calls from potential interested parties.

Burges Salmon are the instructing solicitors - the Judgment also confirms this - so they are a part of the legal team; as you say also consisting of David Matthias QC and George Mackenzie.

Well obviously the club need a solicitor to instruct counsel but the real meaty advice comes from your barristers.

Rovers legal team for this case are David Matthias QC and George Mackenzie (junior) of Francis Taylor Building based in London, not Burges Salmon.

Watola is hardly going to say in a public interview that BRFC have a "plan B" or how they are funding their legal costs. Part of their case is based on the fact they are skint and will be in trouble if they don't move to UWE. Therefore, in public they are going to play on this.

As I've said previously, they have a "plan B" and maybe even a "plan C" for that matter. Talk of administration is way off the mark.

He meets him in an underground car-park. The guy's codename is Deep Throat.

 

I cannot reveal who it is either, but all I know is he's tubby and often carries a bottle of Chianti about with him....

I can confirm it is not Christopher Biggins.

While you were right about most things kid didn't you say that rovers had a strong case and win? Is it the same person giving you info as that?

I talk to many people...

I said that people working close to the case felt Rovers had a very good chance of winning, that Sainsbury's were trying to worm out of the contract (which they patently were)...

Even if Rovers lose their appeal I think they'll have "options" that will certainly ensure they won't go under.

The inside man alludes otherwise.....

With respect, he wouldn't know what I know.

Don't get me wrong they are in a very bad place financially and Higgs is being irresponsible, naive at best, but there is light at the end of the tunnel even if they lose in the court of appeal.

People predicting this is the beginning of the end for the sags will be disappointed I think...

And that will kill the club

No it won't. It'll be the end for Higgs though if they lose.

Can they actually afford an appeal tho?

Yes, hence they are appealing.

Rovers are definitely going to appeal the decision (inside info).

I heard a story this week about the famous Bristol Rovers, it went something like this...

'The famous Bristol Rovers went to court to see a judge,

the famous Bristol Rovers went to court to see a judge,

the famous Bristol Rovers went to court to see a judge,

and this is what she said, "Sainsbury's must succeed because of the construction of Schedule 1 to the Agreement [2.11] which seems to me to be an insuperable barrier to the Club."'

I'm not sure that last bit scans properly so maybe one of our resident wordsmiths can find a shorter phrase with words to that effect.

Having given this a lot of thought I've come up with:

And this is what she said "#### off!"

Para 27 of the judgement makes interesting reading:

There is little doubt that the Agreement is tortuously, laboriously and in some respects

badly, drafted. It makes any draftsman itch to have a try at it. However I have to

decide what it means.

 

"Watertight", eh?

"Bristol Rovers is a fantastic football club, with a proud tradition and a fan-base envied by dozens of clubs higher up the football league, and which deserves a home that is fit-for-purpose.

Read more: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Breaking-news-Bristol-Rovers-lose-crucial/story-26891154-detail/story.html#ixzz3fltB03Vm
Follow us: @BristolPost on Twitter | bristolpost on Facebook

The arrogance of their club is astonishing. Who exactly are these dozens of clubs higher up the league that are envious of Roverzzz prowed tradition and fan base?? They are basically implying that they have a prouder tradition and better fan base than every club in League One!

Laughable.

It's this kind of arrogance that will no doubt see them waste further money on an appeal, despite the fact that very few succeed in the Court of Appeal.
 

Wow, didn't see that coming!

Goodbye Bristol Rovers!

[Mods please don't merge, not until it is all finished at least]

I have arrived at Courtroom 16 of the High Court and there was a handful of deluded Gasheads here as well (and even more locked outside!) so the atmosphere is building.

I will try and keep everyone updated as best I can as it goes on and then make what sense I can of the judgment when I get it.

Higgs and co there mate?

Ah, no you are absolutely bang on. I was picking up on the 'done nothing wrong legally' comment in relation to dragging their heels. I suppose the point there is again it turns on the contract and really what it required of Sainsburys. Their delays could in the circumstances be reasonable, so no compo even if they were heel-dragging.

That's why predictions aren't really worth making, I'd say even of those who went along to watch. Simply because you really need to have the contract, read it cover to cover and get the themes and the essence of 'ok what did the parties actually agree to here' because the Courts will rarely infer or imply terms. Largely, it is what it is.

Explains why it's such a laborious task making judgment. If complex it's not a case of listening to what's presented in Court and getting a feeling. She may be painstakingly going through the contract, evidence of negotiations leading there, correspondence after etc. To a Rovers fan it might feel like it's taken ages but there's an unthinkable amount of work to do... And then write the damn thing, all the meanwhile juggling other cases.

You are correct. I know people that worked on the case and I can tell you that no one has a scooby which way this will go.

My inkling is that this is a messy case tho and I suspect neither party will get what they want in totality.

I hope to be there, c'mon 'set!

Even though we have been successful using our wingback system we will need a plan b. I am sure SC is aware that most teams in the championship last season played with a back 4 and only one striker. If we needed to switch to that system then we would need genuine attacking wide players. Murphys 9 goals in 39 was not too shabby in my opinion for a wide player.

This.

Pretty sure we will sign a winger this summer for the reason you state. Whether it's Murphy we'll have to wait and see...

i kid you not

No. I kid, you not.

Robert Smith of The Cure is from Crawley.

11 point gap to 3rd with 12 to play.

That's big.

Expecting a much improved performance after Saturday.

At the end of the day on paper this is the best away side in the division versus Orient, who have the worst home record in the division winning just 3 times all season.

They've won their last two against Walsall and Oldham who aren't in great form themselves and I'm confident we'll be a different proposition this evening.

Little disappointed JEt doesn't start and slightly worried that the bench without Smith doesn't look terribly attacking or that it has sufficient attacking options.

Terrible result. How the **** we've conceded 3 in one half against these lot?

They've won as many away games on the road as they have at home. That said, most of those wins have come against teams in the bottom half. Talking of tricky run-ins Peterborough still have to travel to all of the current top 6 teams.

They'll come and have a go I'd have thought, they've nothing to lose really. Could be a troubling evening for City unless we get back to something close to our best form.