TAKEOVER COMPLETE - H & G Finally Jibbed!

Liverpool Football Club - General Discussion

Postby Redman in wales » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:30 pm

Benny The Noon wrote:
dawson99 wrote:
Ciggy wrote:
Greavesie wrote:WOOOOHOOOO!! feck off Hicks, I await your next move, kunt

is right judge  :cool:

Wonder what bullsh!t will fly our way in the next few hours?

This is not the end of it by any means.

dunno how much further it CAN go... once the high court has dismissed Texan rulings... that has to more or less be it surely

Only thing they can do now i sue - they cant stop the sale anymore .

yeah... they can sue / claim for damages
User avatar
Redman in wales
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 4342
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:02 pm
Location: Oxford

Postby Ciggy » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:30 pm

andy_g wrote:ok, so far so good. what the hell happens now though?

Something else is bound to happen before the days out you just know it will, after that palava last night.
There is no-one anywhere in the world at any stage who is any bigger or any better than this football club.

Kenny Dalglish 1/2/2011

REST IN PEACE PHIL, YOU WILL NEVER BE FORGOTTEN.
User avatar
Ciggy
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 26826
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 2:36 pm

Postby zarababe » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:30 pm

They need to convene the meeting in front of the judge and sign the docs NOW... :D
THE BRENDAN REVOLUTION IS UPON US !

KING KENNY.. Always LEGEND !

RAFA.. MADE THE PEOPLE HAPPY !

Miss YOU Phil-Drummer - RIP YNWA

Image

Image
User avatar
zarababe
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 11731
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 1:54 pm
Location: London

Postby liverpoolusfan » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:31 pm

tommycockles wrote:I'll wait until i see the new owners at Anfield before i celebrate too much, surely twit and :censored: will now try something else.

Yes Hicks/Gilette just twitted they are going to Mars to file an injunction there too hoping the Martians will be more sympathetic.  :alien:
liverpoolusfan
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: USA

Postby Johnny Boy » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:32 pm

I just pray it goes through NOW, I can't stand any more waiting, if it goes to US court anything could happen.
User avatar
Johnny Boy
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:18 am
Location: Lancashire

Postby Redman in wales » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:32 pm

Ciggy wrote:
andy_g wrote:ok, so far so good. what the hell happens now though?

Something else is bound to happen before the days out you just know it will, after that palava last night.

yeah...

... Hicks is now gonna sue Lakes10 for damages up to $1.6 Billion dollars!!!
User avatar
Redman in wales
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 4342
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:02 pm
Location: Oxford

Postby SouthCoastShankly » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:32 pm

zarababe wrote:They need to convene the meeting in front of the judge and sign the docs NOW... :D

"Yeah, while you're there Floyd. Do you mind witnessing the signature on this document?"....


:D
User avatar
SouthCoastShankly
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 6076
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:36 pm
Location: West Sussex

Postby Benny The Noon » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:32 pm

TheLad wrote:What's next? It surely isn't over yet.

They can sue for damages but will no longer be able to stop the sale of the club . They are royally screwed .
Benny The Noon
 

Postby red187 » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:33 pm

Explaination of an anti-suit injunction

In the area of conflict of laws, anti-suit injunction is an order issued by a court or arbitral tribunal[1] that prevents an opposing party from commencing or continuing a proceeding in another jurisdiction or forum. If the opposing party contravenes such an order issued by a court, a contempt of court order may be issued by the domestic court against that party.

It is often used as a means to prevent forum shopping. In recent years many jurisdictions have placed a high standard to obtain an injunction such as where the proceedings are "oppressive or vexatious". Furthermore, in proceedings where Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 applies to the parties, the anti-suit injunction is no longer available to assist litigation [2] or arbitration [3].
User avatar
red187
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 12:32 pm

Postby Benny The Noon » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:34 pm

Johnny Boy wrote:I just pray it goes through NOW, I can't stand any more waiting, if it goes to US court anything could happen.

The ruling of the court today means they cant go to a US Court to stop the sale - something to do with an understanding between UK High Court and US Supreme Court .
Benny The Noon
 

Postby Redangel » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:34 pm

5.25pm: So, the board and RBS has won it's London court battle. But, what exactly this means is another question. Will the Dallas court now back off and withdraw its injunction?

This expert opinion from Mark Stephens, sports lawyer and international litigator at Finers Stephens Innocent:

    The application for a TRO (injunction) in a Texas City court is one last, desperate, throw of the dice for Gillett & Hicks reveals how bankrupt their legal position is...basic principles of international law are (1) that an injunction issued by a Texas Court has no effect on actions in this (the UK) country; and, (2) that the court first dealing with the case should be the only court dealing with the matter to the end. Therefore, the Texas court will have to relinquish control to the High Court in London...if Hicks and Gilett really wanted to stop this transaction they needed an injunction from the High Court in London and another against New England Sports Ventures in Boston where that company is located.

    I confidently predict that RBS and the Directors will be able to shrug off this irksome litigation which seems calculated to delay the takeover which will ultimately be consumated.
Redangel
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Merseyside

Postby dawson99 » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:34 pm

its all going through.. all legal!!!!
0118 999 881 999 119 7253
Image
User avatar
dawson99
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 25377
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 12:56 pm
Location: in the mo fo hood y'all

Postby Ian Rush's Right foot » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:34 pm

5.30pm: Sachin Nakrani from outside court:

Good news for Liverpool but as yet we don't know what this really means. Likely that court in Texas will still have to recognise this verdict. But at moment it's Liverpool 2 Owners 1

5.25pm: So, the board and RBS has won it's London court battle. But, what exactly this means is another question. Will the Dallas court now back off and withdraw its injunction?

This expert opinion from Mark Stephens, sports lawyer and international litigator at Finers Stephens Innocent:

The application for a TRO (injunction) in a Texas City court is one last, desperate, throw of the dice for Gillett & Hicks reveals how bankrupt their legal position is...basic principles of international law are (1) that an injunction issued by a Texas Court has no effect on actions in this (the UK) country; and, (2) that the court first dealing with the case should be the only court dealing with the matter to the end. Therefore, the Texas court will have to relinquish control to the High Court in London...if Hicks and Gilett really wanted to stop this transaction they needed an injunction from the High Court in London and another against New England Sports Ventures in Boston where that company is located.

I confidently predict that RBS and the Directors will be able to shrug off this irksome litigation which seems calculated to delay the takeover which will ultimately be consumated.
Image

....I'm the bee's knee, his legs and his arms.....
User avatar
Ian Rush's Right foot
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 11:58 am
Location: London

Postby zarababe » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:35 pm

SouthCoastShankly wrote:
zarababe wrote:They need to convene the meeting in front of the judge and sign the docs NOW... :D

"Yeah, while you're there Floyd. Do you mind witnessing the signature on this document?"....


:D

:D  :laugh:

The expert view now:

This expert opinion from Mark Stephens, sports lawyer and international litigator at Finers Stephens Innocent:

The application for a TRO (injunction) in a Texas City court is one last, desperate, throw of the dice for Gillett & Hicks reveals how bankrupt their legal position is...basic principles of international law are (1) that an injunction issued by a Texas Court has no effect on actions in this (the UK) country; and, (2) that the court first dealing with the case should be the only court dealing with the matter to the end. Therefore, the Texas court will have to relinquish control to the High Court in London...if Hicks and Gilett really wanted to stop this transaction they needed an injunction from the High Court in London and another against New England Sports Ventures in Boston where that company is located.

I confidently predict that RBS and the Directors will be able to shrug off this irksome litigation which seems calculated to delay the takeover which will ultimately be consumated
THE BRENDAN REVOLUTION IS UPON US !

KING KENNY.. Always LEGEND !

RAFA.. MADE THE PEOPLE HAPPY !

Miss YOU Phil-Drummer - RIP YNWA

Image

Image
User avatar
zarababe
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 11731
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 1:54 pm
Location: London

Postby Greavesie » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:35 pm

we could be Newkit Co after this, nice little firm of lawyers here :laugh: :laugh:
All round the fields of Anfield Road
Where once we watched the King Kenny play (and could he play!)
Stevie Heighway on the wing
We had dreams and songs to sing
'Bout the glory, round the Fields of Anfield Road

JFT 96 - Gone but never forgotten
YNWA 15/4/1989
God Bless You All
User avatar
Greavesie
 
Posts: 9100
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 2:29 am
Location: Newcastle

PreviousNext

Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 68 guests

  • Advertisement
ShopTill-e