Jump to content

Court It Is Then


Bobbyhouston
 Share

Recommended Posts

they are but that's the ruling of the judge

 

he said that we had no costs bound to the DU and others case as it was 1-1

 

hiwever the SPFL only really argued on putting the case to arbitration. & they substantially win that case - I think he mentioned that as the arbitration articles weren't well written or clearly defined, then it let's us off paying full cost of SPFL and so 50% was deemed fair 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Given the timescale given for the arbitration, there's absolutely no way this ends up with Hearts in the Premier League next season (and by extension Thistle in the Championship) unless the clubs have a change of heart and decide to rip-up the league structure and do some restructuring.

We are in the realms of token solidarity payments to make the lawyers from all sides go away now, I suspect.

The Fulham case always looked more compelling than the St Johnstone case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:

I think that it's a decent result. Score draw away from home.

Let's be clear, this is pretty much us 4-1 down with 2 minutes to go and all players have just been banned from using their legs for the remainder of the game.

Whether or not crab football is a farce, we've basically lost.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Woodstock Jag said:

The presumption is that costs follow success.

We have, erm, pretty much failed.

Not really - costs only awarded as SPFL 'offered' us arbitration before Court. 

3 motions. 

1. To throw it out - dismissed. 1-0 Thistle

2. Arbitration - judge reluctantly agreed, stated it can go back to Court if arbitration fails. 1-1

3. Release the documents - judge agreed. 2-1 Thistle.

Not saying it's the result we wanted, but Court door is open & the release of the documents could be interesting. LONG way to go yet I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Let's be clear, this is pretty much us 4-1 down with 2 minutes to go and all players have just been banned from using their legs for the remainder of the game.

Whether or not crab football is a farce, we've basically lost.

Haha! Crab football! Remember it well! Happy days.

 

ETA Is Crab Football an option for next season?

Edited by Gary Peebles Tackle
Add on
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:

Not really - costs only awarded as SPFL 'offered' us arbitration before Court. 

3 motions. 

1. To throw it out - dismissed. 1-0 Thistle

2. Arbitration - judge reluctantly agreed, stated it can go back to Court if arbitration fails. 1-1

3. Release the documents - judge agreed. 2-1 Thistle.

Not saying it's the result we wanted, but Court door is open & the release of the documents could be interesting. LONG way to go yet I think.

This is like saying we won on corners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:

Not really - costs only awarded as SPFL 'offered' us arbitration before Court. 

3 motions. 

1. To throw it out - dismissed. 1-0 Thistle

2. Arbitration - judge reluctantly agreed, stated it can go back to Court if arbitration fails. 1-1

3. Release the documents - judge agreed. 2-1 Thistle.

Not saying it's the result we wanted, but Court door is open & the release of the documents could be interesting. LONG way to go yet I think.

Was there not an injury time equaliser, namely the awarding of 50% of SPFL's costs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:

Haha! The ol' Alex Totten approach. 

I think the documents is a good win. Arbitration, who knows. Wasn't thrown out though and judge certainly seemed to agree that it's a shambles of an organisation. 

I always thought arbitration was where we should go anyway

Legal case is all or nothing

Arbitration, different process, more of a range of outcomes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, jaf said:

I always thought arbitration was where we should go anyway

Legal case is all or nothing

Arbitration, different process, more of a range of outcomes

I think arbitration at least plausibly could lead to some sort of ex gratia solidarity payment from the SPFL to recognise the unfairness, but I suspect even that's out the window now that we've got enough lawyers involved that legal bills are racking up on both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, jaf said:

Was there not an injury time equaliser, namely the awarding of 50% of SPFL's costs?

not sure that was a full equaliser. He could have awarded full costs.

I think we live to fight another day. It may not be the win that we wanted, but it is certainly not the waste of time that some were predicting. The SPFL didn't come out of it smelling of roses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I think arbitration at least plausibly could lead to some sort of ex gratia solidarity payment from the SPFL to recognise the unfairness, but I suspect even that's out the window now that we've got enough lawyers involved that legal bills are racking up on both sides.

Surely an independent panel will not rule against any compensation if that’s what they deem to be correct solely because of the money spent on lawyers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, jaf said:

Was there not an injury time equaliser, namely the awarding of 50% of SPFL's costs?

I have been too busy with other things to tune into the hearing. Been relying on news and this website for information and opinion. 

Did Lord Clark actually rule that this case can return to court should Arbitration fail! 

 

This seens strange to me because Arbitration by its very nature cannot fail! 

The panel will hear evidence in addition to written submissions and then make a decision. Whether we like the decision or not is immaterial! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, exiledjag said:

I have been too busy with other things to tune into the hearing. Been relying on news and this website for information and opinion. 

Did Lord Clark actually rule that this case can return to court should Arbitration fail! 

 

This seens strange to me because Arbitration by its very nature cannot fail! 

The panel will hear evidence in addition to written submissions and then make a decision. Whether we like the decision or not is immaterial! 

He did say there could be provision for it to return to the CofS if they drag their heels on setting it up - he mentioned 1st of August as a date 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I think we live to fight another day. It may not be the win that we wanted, but it is certainly not the waste of time that some were predicting. The SPFL didn't come out of it smelling of roses.

That would have taken some make-over

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...