Guest Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Very interesting article. Wonder why they are having a hearing to determine leave to appeal as it can be a paper exercise... Notably it doesn't say which Court they are applying to: the High Ct or the Ct of appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
42nite Posted July 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Very interesting article. Wonder why they are having a hearing to determine leave to appeal as it can be a paper exercise... Notably it doesn't say which Court they are applying to: the High Ct or the Ct of appeal. Can you translate in basic English what might be going on? Ta. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargent Pepper Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 "Ere' this Trashton tart up is rubbish. All that money and no cheap white patio chairs?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 This bit from the evil post is intriguing: "Even if the club was to win on appeal, they would only be awarded damages instead of the multinational being forced to buy the Memorial Stadium." If this is the case; then regardless of the UWE's position, the project is dead in the water as of now. Absolutely right. I mean in reality I would suggest the project has been dead for a while but that's the first time I've seen it "confirmed". Be interested to know where The Post got this from. Could the appeal court judge not order performance of contract? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Can you translate in basic English what might be going on? Ta. Haha sorry mate - reading back I was a little off I imagine Friday they rock up to the high court for an oral hearing to apply for permission to appeal. If successful then it's onwards to the court of appeal - unless they settle out of court. If unsuccessful then either the matter stops dead or they have another go by effectively asking the court of appeal to hold an appeal hearing. Alternatively they could be making their application for leave to appeal directly to the Court of Appeal (and skipping the first stage). That might be unlikely but who knows? As for the UWE being dead bit I wonder where EP have got that information from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 As for the UWE being dead bit I wonder where EP have got that information from. OTIB probably. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Only thing going for it is that it's posted in the evening post But if any of it is true then it is good night Irene, It confirms my suspensions that Higgs is only after his money back, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityloyal473 Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Absolutely right. I mean in reality I would suggest the project has been dead for a while but that's the first time I've seen it "confirmed". Be interested to know where The Post got this from. Could the appeal court judge not order performance of contract? With regards performance of contract I really wouldn't know, although the more this goes on the more it looks like its no longer about performance of the contract but all about Piggs and others getting some money back (as many have suspected). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 With regards performance of contract I really wouldn't know, although the more this goes on the more it looks like its no longer about performance of the contract but all about Piggs and others getting some money back (as many have suspected). Well yes. Any court winnings were to do with the stadium which is separately owned by the directors. If they won enough then they might have given some to the team but they would have kept the lion's share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityloyal473 Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Well yes. Any court winnings were to do with the stadium which is separately owned by the directors. If they won enough then they might have given some to the team but they would have kept the lion's share. I probably didn't explain it clearly enough. Higgs and co have always maintained that this is about getting the money to fulfil the UWE contract, and thats the line that has been fed to Sags. Most people with any common sense realised a long time ago that its all about Piggs and co getting something back, whilst being unable to complete the UWE contract. I think the Post story, if accurate, should confirm to all but the most rose tinted followers of the Sags that the UWE is over. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Wow , the Gas Hit Squad have really let themselves go. Bit disrespectful if I may say That's actually their legal team Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderup Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Ok, he is a fat ugly deluded b**t*rd BUT my question is ! Is that his Mrs (damn ugly mind) or his sister ? I know it is potentially the same thing but i really need to know Both I should think! A thousand apologies BF! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 It doesn't look good for them, the fact the gas haven't issued an official response (they have done with in an hour to previous articles) says to me the post have pretty much nailed what's going on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lita For Congo Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 It doesn't look good for them, the fact the gas haven't issued an official response (they have done with in an hour to previous articles) says to me the post have pretty much nailed what's going on In regards to what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Hunt-Hertz Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 As others have said, what a belter Takes a scarf, but forgets his coat on a wet day - hope he gets a cold That's cos he`s gas, and he`s rock. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityloyal473 Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Is their forum in meltdown, again? Surprisingly no. Too busy laying the blame at Sainsbury's and not looking closer to home. Also surprising (or not) is that they don't seem to have picked up on the statement by the post indicating that they can only seek damages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awbb Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmite Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Just a thought but if the UWE are going through the small print, does this mean they may chase Rovers for breach of contract issues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Just a thought but if the UWE are going through the small print, does this mean they may chase Rovers for breach of contract issues? Not sure it would be in their interest, certainly wouldn't do their image any good. I bet they're pissed off mind, they could have had their 5k stadium built by now. Next steps - sags try and muscle in on Clifton RFCs plans at Cribbs, although I've been too in all likelihood the huge car park at the men will be sold and a new stand built Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awbb Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) Just a thought but if the UWE are going through the small print, does this mean they may chase Rovers for breach of contract issues? Just an interested party I would imagine. They would probably want to assess Rovers' chance of success before committing to keeping the land aside or doing otherwise with it. As for being a damages only claim I don't know any reason why specific performance cannot be the remedy claimed - if the E P are correct. A guess for one reasoning but perhaps specific performance cannot be awarded because Rovers can now no longer comply with a condition precedent - a term which is fundamental to the contract. What confuses me from the EP article is if the claim was now a damages-only claim why would UWE care about going through the judgment in detail... it's dead? Edited July 30, 2015 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awbb Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) Edited July 30, 2015 by awbb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Just an interested party I would imagine. They would probably want to assess Rovers' chance of success before committing to keeping the land aside or doing otherwise with it. As for could the Court on appeal award specific performance (ie complete the contract) I know of no reason why it could not. Perhaps Rovers are now not claiming for specific performance but for financial compensation? Perhaps specific performance cannot be awarded because Rovers can now no longer comply with a condition precedent - a term which is fundamental to the contract. What confuses me from the EP article is if the claim was now a damages-only claim why would UWE care about going through the judgment in detail... it's dead? I think uwe are sitting on the fence waiting for this mystical plan b they keep referring too, What stands out for me is the fact the gas haven't come out and dented it, they did with just about everything else regarding the new ground but not this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Up The City! Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 A good cup run for us or us getting into the play offs or the rugby getting promoted and playing the likes of Bath will see will see 27k sell outs imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Not sure it would be in their interest, certainly wouldn't do their image any good. I bet they're pissed off mind, they could have had their 5k stadium built by now.Next steps - sags try and muscle in on Clifton RFCs plans at Cribbs, although I've been too in all likelihood the huge car park at the men will be sold and a new stand built Car park sold for housing to fund a new stand and you'd be on the money I reckon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Car park sold for housing to fund a new stand and you'd be on the money I reckon... if they did that the plans for the new stand would be blocked by the nimbys due to increased parking in the surrounding residential areas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.