Notices
Closed Thread
Page 3 of 284 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 8491

Thread: Liverpool FC v Hicks & Gillett: Legal Shenanigans

  1. #61  
    NACNUD is online now Justice Campaigner Extraordinaire
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    37,780
    Quote Originally Posted by el-torres View Post
    omg you serious gamoto!!!! you in north london?
    moy or soy.....
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  2. #62  
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,712
    According to soccernet, the high court date is set for Tuesday.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  3. #63  
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,323
    Quote Originally Posted by LiViD View Post
    There used to be an excellent Indian restaurant nextdoor to the Old ****(male chicken) Tavern on Fleet Street a few years back. If it's still there, and if the same people are there, I highly recommend it for those of you heading in that general direction. (not even sure if the Old ****(male chicken) is still there!)
    The Old ****(male chicken) Tavern is still there... sadly the "ruby" you refer to isn't
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  4. #64  
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,378
    Quote Originally Posted by mikered View Post
    No. West Berlin. And mind your language

    YNWA
    re theres no west berlin anymore!!!
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  5. #65  
    CrawleyRed is online now The Jolly Green Giant's big brother
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    23,561
    Well if its in London I might be able to head over after work. Depends when it's all going down I suppose.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  6. #66  
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,378
    Quote Originally Posted by NACNUD View Post
    moy or soy.....
    huh!! not another greek???
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  7. #67  
    CrawleyRed is online now The Jolly Green Giant's big brother
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    23,561
    http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-27427383/

    A RED army is set to flock to London for what is being billed as the most important days in Liverpool FC history.

    D-Day is expected next week when hundreds of supporters will descend on the High Court for the club’s critical ownership battle.

    Liverpool are currently preparing a heavyweight legal case with solicitors Slaughter and May as they seek a declaratory judgement to formally seal the 300m Reds sale to New England Sports Ventures (NESV), owners of the Boston Red Sox baseball team.

    If Tom Hicks and George Gillett decide to attend the Royal Courts of Justice in person to oppose the move, the Americans have been promised a warm reception.

    Liverpool fan groups said many of them were planning to line the streets of the Strand in the capital.

    Today, James McKenna, spokesman for Spirit of Shankly, said there had already been interest among supporters in heading to London.

    He told the ECHO: "People have started talking about heading down to London, particularly if Hicks and Gillett will be there. I do know supporters have been discussing making their presence known.

    "There’s only one door in and one door out of the court, so it’s a good opportunity to make our feelings known."

    Further scrutiny of New England Sports Ventures reveals they have made assurances no money will ever be taken from Liverpool FC and used to invest in the sports investment company back in Boston.

    And executives have vowed to slash the club’s crippling 25m annual interest repayments - triggered by Hicks and Gillett’s huge leveraged stake at Anfield - to just 2m a year.

    That would free up a significant sum of 23m each year to invest in the playing squad or stadium, the ECHO believes.

    The exact day when the Reds’ future will be played out by top barristers in the courts as yet remains unknown.

    But with the Royal Bank of Scotland deadline fast approaching, when the owners must pay back their 237m debt, the matter will almost certainly be listed before next Friday.

    It is thought no formal approach has yet been made to list the case with the High Court.

    Her Majesty’s Courts Service said emergency matters, such as this, could be given a slot within days.

    Stephen Horner, member of Reds pressure group Kop Faithful, said: "We want a speedy conclusion which will mean the debt is cleared and we can move on with a new stadium.

    "Fans are very keen this deal with New England is pushed over the line. If (LFC chairman) Martin Broughton is pushing forward, clearly we have carried out due diligence and this is right for the club. If protesting outside the courts is something we feel we need to do, then we will do it. Everyone wants a resolution sooner rather than later."

    Liverpool are certain the ownership dispute will be resolved, either way, by a week on Friday and the prospect of the legal battle rumbling on for weeks or even months, as predicted by some finance experts, is a scenario given little credence at Anfield.

    Nigel Boardman, from Slaughter and May, is thought to be leading Liverpool’s legal team, a man named by The Times in their 100 most influential people in business.

    And in an eye opening turn of events yesterday, the London-based branch of a New-York law firm pointedly removed themselves from any association from co-owner Tom Hicks.

    After legal press reports named Weil, Gotshal & Manges as representing the Texan at next week’s court hearing, top employees were bombarded with emails from angry Reds.

    Hours later, after being contacted by the ECHO, they issued a statement which said: "We are not acting for the owners of Liverpool FC in relation to the dispute with LFC. In addition, in our role advising the owners, we have never acted, and would never act, adverse to Liverpool FC."

    After a frenetic 24 hours on Wednesday, with both Liverpool FC and Tom Hicks issuing statements and counter-statements, yesterday was a period of relative calm, publicly at least.

    The Texan refused to expand on his position, curtly outlined in a statement late on Wednesday, when he called Martin Broughton’s move to sanction the NESV sale as unlawful.

    Today, it also emerged how Boston Red Sox owner hedge fund manager John Henry and NESV chairman Tom Werner, two of 17 stakeholders in the sports investment company, had been on the verge of coming to Liverpool on Wednesday, under the assumption their deal to take over the Reds was complete.

    But the trip, after negotiations with Martin Broughton in London were cordially agreed, was cancelled after Hicks and Gillett’s dramatic boardroom intervention which flung Liverpool’s future into a legal minefield.

    The purchase of the club has been formally approved and papers signed, despite the pending court battle.

    If the English board members are successful, a few minor formalities will be completed to give them the keys to Anfield, a stadium which has already been visited by the Americans.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  8. #68  
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,712
    So the court date is next week and protest planned?????.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  9. #69  
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,768
    Takeover set for High Court next week
    By Harry Harris, Football Correspondent and ESPNsoccernet staff

    October 7, 2010
    Comment
    Email
    Print
    Liverpool have confirmed that they have failed in their bid to have their High Court hearing on Friday and that the civil war with owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett is now scheduled for "early next week".


    GettyImages

    Tom Hicks and George Gillett are on their way out of Liverpool and the Premier League

    Redknapp: Americans are blameless
    Board sets out investment plan
    Owners to stick with Hodgson
    Brewin: Out of the frying pan
    In profile: John W Henry
    Forum: In favour of the takeover?

    ESPNsoccernet understands that Liverpool applied for the the case to be fast-tracked through the High Court, but now are resigned to the matter being heard by as early as Tuesday as Liverpool's lawyers, Slaughter and May, seek to derail the American duo's attempts to block the 300 million sale to the owners of the Boston Red Sox.

    Hicks and Gillett are plotting their own sale of the club to give them back their 144 million investment, and want the courts to block the takeover, which has been agreed by Martin Broughton over their heads.

    One of the most fascinating civil wars in football history needs to be aired ahead of the October 15 deadline when the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) have the power to call in their 237 million debt.

    Broughton is confident that Hicks and Gillett will not be successful in blocking the sale due to the written undertakings they made when handing over control of the club. Broughton says he was given the power to change the composition of the board and that efforts by the Americans to remove Ian Ayre and Christian Purslow, prior to the sale being announced, were not legitimate.

    "I am confident we will prevail, but you can never be 100% when you go to court," Broughton said. "We will be seeking a judgment that we acted within our rights. They tried to remove Ian and Christian, and after taking legal advice I told them that was invalid.

    "I think we'll get there, but I can't make a promise. If the case goes against us, we do have a fallback position, but we're not prepared to discuss this at present."

    Hicks' New York-based spokesman, Mark Semer, has said that Broughton's claim that the sale cannot be blocked is false.

    "There were no such undertakings given to Broughton. The board has been legally reconstituted, and the new board does not approve of this proposed transaction,'' Semer told Bloomberg News.

    An attempted coup, which would have seen Hicks' son Mack and Lori McCuthcheon, of Hicks Holdings, replace Purslow and Ayre, was rejected.

    Broughton is confident he and the other two England-based members of the board have acted appropriately but they will not be able to have that confirmed until the issue is thrashed out in court.

    The Premier League is also expected to approve the takeover by New England Sports Ventures (NESV) that will see John W Henry's company purchase Liverpool for 300 million - which will wipe out most of the club's debt - on Friday.

    It is thought the deal will be fully completed by the time Liverpool cross Stanley Park for the Merseyside derby against Everton on October 17 and it is reported that, even if Hicks and Gillett win the court case, RBS will call in the debt and immediately sell the club to Henry.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  10. #70  
    elrojo2005 is offline Academy prospect
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,465
    Quote Originally Posted by MickeyLove View Post
    Apparently it will be the high court and he must attend.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hamKl-su8PE
    Right then......I'll be on the grassy knoll.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  11. #71  
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    16,642
    Not a bad wee pub directly across from it.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  12. #72  
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,889
    I can make it there on tuesday.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  13. #73  
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,378
    Quote Originally Posted by Fernandoslovechild View Post
    I can make it there on tuesday.
    im there!!!!

    p.s any idea on time?
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  14. #74  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    509
    if anyone gets any firm details, I'm off there
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  15. #75  
    Fowi is online now Hall of Fame Resident and Top Poster Who Shook The Boards
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    122,507
    What if they simply argue that this bid is unfair on the owners as they lose a lot of money? Surely they can prove that other bids were better financially?
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  16. #76  
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    20,202
    Quote Originally Posted by proud1 View Post
    if anyone gets any firm details, I'm off there
    Me too, hence why i started the topic trouble is i don't want to travel from near Cardiff to London on Tuesday just to find out it's a 3 day trial, want to be there on D-Day kind of thing.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  17. #77  
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    20,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    What if they simply argue that this bid is unfair on the owners as they lose a lot of money? Surely they can prove that other bids were better financially?
    The only other accepted bid was of a similar value.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  18. #78  
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    24,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    What if they simply argue that this bid is unfair on the owners as they lose a lot of money? Surely they can prove that other bids were better financially?
    Broughton said this was actually the the highest offer?
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  19. #79  
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    44,616
    [QUOTE=Seminole
    It is thought the deal will be fully completed by the time Liverpool cross Stanley Park for the Merseyside derby against Everton on October 17 and it is reported that, even if Hicks and Gillett win the court case, RBS will call in the debt and immediately sell the club to Henry.[/QUOTE]

    We have to hope then that RBS has the administration legalities all sorted and can serve the owners with notice of foreclosure the moment the court case goes in their (H&G's) favour, if that happens.

    However, my fear is that the owners already have a financial backer lined up to refinance the debt and will bring this up in court, which could turn things dramatically in their favour.
    Let's hope the judge is not a chav/manc/bitter etc
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  20. #80  
    Fowi is online now Hall of Fame Resident and Top Poster Who Shook The Boards
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    122,507
    Quote Originally Posted by -PRAETORIAN- View Post
    The only other accepted bid was of a similar value.
    But they can argue that neither bid was good enough. The club isnt forced to accept either bid.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  21. #81  
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    24,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    But they can argue that neither bid was good enough. The club isnt forced to accept either bid.
    The club costs as much as the market says it does. And in current situation it's exactly about 300m.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  22. #82  
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    20,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    But they can argue that neither bid was good enough. The club isnt forced to accept either bid.
    There were 80 interested parties throughout this "auction" both accepted bids valued the club at the same value, this will show the the courts the current market value of the club and that they have found the best deal to sell the club and pay off the RBS debt.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  23. #83  
    Fowi is online now Hall of Fame Resident and Top Poster Who Shook The Boards
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    122,507
    Quote Originally Posted by -PRAETORIAN- View Post
    There were 80 interested parties throughout this "auction" both accepted bids valued the club at the same value, this will show the the courts the current market value of the club and that they have found the best deal to sell the club and pay off the RBS debt.
    But surely the court will think that those in charge of selling the club have an obligation to get the best financial deal for the people owning the club? Hicks can claim this hasn't happened.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  24. #84  
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    24,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    But surely the court will think that those in charge of selling the club have an obligation to get the best financial deal for the people owning the club? Hicks can claim this hasn't happened.
    On the one side is Hicks claiming that. But what's on the other side? Club run by Hicks paying 100k daily in interest. It's a no brainer.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  25. #85  
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    20,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    But surely the court will think that those in charge of selling the club have an obligation to get the best financial deal for the people owning the club? Hicks can claim this hasn't happened.
    Hicks will claim that on the premise that Forbes valued us at $600 million, Broughton will show after an exhausted sale process of over 80 interested parties that 300 million is the true value.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  26. #86  
    TomHighwaysM16 is online now Academy prospect
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,049
    http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...t-2100899.html

    British lawyers believe that Liverpool's American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett face a supremely difficult task convincing a High Court judge that the sale of the club to New England Sports Ventures (NESV) is illegal, a move which they will attempt in order to prolong their unpopular tenure on Merseyside.

    It is much needed good news for a club that continues to face huge on-field challenges. Fernando Torres is understood to be harbouring doubts about where his future lies, even though he appeared yesterday to be winning his battle to shake off the adductor muscle injury he sustained in the home defeat to Blackpool and should be fit for the crucial Goodison derby on Sunday week.

    Lawyers for the English contingent of the Liverpool board, who are awaiting the 24-hour notice they will receive of the High Court hearing which will rule on the legality of the club's sale to NESV, do seem to have a strong case. Legal opinion on the sale which Hicks and Gillett insist has been rendered invalid because they had suspended two of the directors who voted in the 3-2 decision is that the Americans have handed non-executive chairman Martin Broughton a huge court-room asset by signing off to him the right to hire and fire directors.

    "If that undertaking is in place, signed and sealed, [he] has a very solid case to seek a declaration that the board are entitled to sell the club," Andrew Nixon, a partner for Thomas Eggar, said yesterday. "If they have broken an undertaking that is a factual issue."

    The articles of association, in which Broughton's right to hire and fire directors and the current owners' undertaking not to take any action to frustrate a sale are enshrined, are critical to the case, Mr Nixon added. "If they show that [Broughton] has powers of process in both the sale and appointment of directors, it is going to be very, very hard for Hicks and Gillett to get around that."

    Asked by The Independent 48 hours ago whether the undertakings were indeed signed and sealed by Hicks and Gillett, Broughton replied: "They signed them and made them to RBS [Royal Bank of Scotland] as a condition of the lending extension [which gave Hicks and Gillett an additional six months' leeway on their 237m loans]." Broughton added that the undertakings "changed the articles [of] the company." Puzzlingly, there is no mention of these vital changes in the articles of association for Kop Football, the holding company which approved the NESV sale, though it is quite possible that they have been signed off through additional papers.

    Further details have emerged about how NESC beat off a rival bid from Asia on Tuesday. NESC, owners of the Boston Red Sox, increased the cash element of their 300m bid to 240m when both interested parties had tabled the same offer for Liverpool.

    Hicks and Gillett's case will centre on whether the 300m sale to NESV, who are today expected to be cleared by the Premier League as fit and proper owners, represents an undervaluation of the club. Under the 2007 Companies Act, it is the fiduciary duty of any director to secure the best value for a company. "If they can give proper evidence that the 600m price they are talking about is realistic, they have a case," Mr Nixon added. "If they can't prove there could be a better sale, they are going to have a very, very difficult job."

    Broughton has not ruled out the pair being able to demonstrate that someone, somewhere values the club at 600m. "I never like to put anything beyond them," he said on Tuesday. But Liverpool would be staggered if, after a year-long search for buyers ultimately tempted only two takers, Hicks and Gillett manage to demonstrate that there are others out there ready to pay twice as much.

    If the legal undertakings cannot be proven and as yet no written evidence of them has been seen by this newspaper then the High Court judge's decision will revolve around the more subjective decision of what constitutes work to "promote the success of a company." Here, the owners may also have problems.

    Bernd Ratzke, head of corporate law at Dawsons, said: "It seems unlikely that the courts will halt the board's plans. Under the Companies Act 2006, Hicks and Gillett would have to demonstrate that the directors are not acting to 'promote the success of the company' and, given that the club is facing administration within a matter of days, that will be a difficult argument to make."

    Even if Hicks and Gillett do win, it seems they would secure only a brief reprieve since RBS is likely to call in its 237m loans if it is not paid by the due date of next Friday. If they have a white knight, he has a week to ride to the rescue.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  27. #87  
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    24,098
    http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...t-2100899.html

    "Lawyers predict court defeat over Liverpool for Hicks and Gillett"
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  28. #88  
    Fowi is online now Hall of Fame Resident and Top Poster Who Shook The Boards
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    122,507
    I'm just thinking Hicks must have something up his sleeve if he's going to court.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  29. #89  
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    20,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Fowi View Post
    I'm just thinking Hicks must have something up his sleeve if he's going to court.
    I'm the same Fowi, probably a result of so many false dawns for us on new owners. It's going to be an eventful week that's for sure.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  30. #90  
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,401
    So the court rules in favour of Hicks and RBS immediately, that very minute, call in the loan due to breach of the extension contract with RBS that gave them assurances of sale and MB control of the board.

    Maybe.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   



Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •