vonwright Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 55 minutes ago, Rambalin said: Need details on exactly what "legal decision" they are seeking. That said, it does kind of suggest that the Boro and Wycombe claims are the central problem, despite what Gibson might say. It still seems likely to me that if those claims were withdrawn or quashed, the sale would go through fairly smoothly. MaltRam, Kathcairns, Indyram and 10 others 6 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cool As Custard Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 500 Up!! RadioactiveWaste, jimtastic56 and PistoldPete 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 3 minutes ago, Eatonram said: But that sort of assumes they are creditors at all (never mind football creditors) They are making a "claim" for unproven (in fact unprovable) damages? If they are taken out of the equation I think any buyer would not want their new Club to face a realistic possibility of being in the 4th tier of the League just 12 months after they take over, which would be likely with further sanctions. So I would assume they want a route to a clean exit, only possible if the parasite claims are dismissed. Bit, the intransigence of the parasite clubs and EFL are driving Quantuma towards a very not optimal solution... Round and round and round it goes. I don't know anything other than being a bit obsessive on this thread, so, I'm very likely wrong and hope I am on some of this, especially the court order stuff. I know nuffin and jimtastic56 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maharan Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Cool As Custard said: Then we'll have to respectfully disagree EFL rules around minimum are not aligned to the law of the land & out of date legally(fact) Therefore if they choose to enforce a 15 point penalty it wouldn't stand up in a court of law They wouldn't have the balls to enforce it The -15 point penalty is an EFL rule, and doesn’t need to align with the law. It’s a condition of membership for the league, which Derby have signed up to. It’s not based on law. The fact that the rules don’t align in certain areas doesn’t mean that all aspects of the EFL rules don’t apply kevinhectoring, RadioactiveWaste, GenBr and 2 others 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Maharan said: The -15 point penalty is an EFL rule, and doesn’t need to align with the law. It’s a condition of membership for the league, which Derby have signed up to. It’s not based on law. The fact that the rules don’t align in certain areas doesn’t mean that all aspects of the EFL rules don’t apply Meh. They could waive them based on their own rules being not fit for purpose! Cool As Custard, RadioactiveWaste and Maharan 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramos Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 6 minutes ago, Cool As Custard said: 500 Up!! Just 500 to go!! jimtastic56 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 (edited) The Nixon article mentions arbitration, perhaps he just means legal action to ensure that this process happens quickly rather than letting the EFL & Boro drag it out by not formally starting the proceedings? Or just legally get them classed as not being creditors. Could getting the claims dismissed via official arbitration expedited by a legal ruling mean there's no need to the do take the cross dressing clam route? After all wasn't that only suggested because nobody was willing to make a ruling on them, so it was the only way not to pay them? Thought splurge! Edited January 28, 2022 by Coconut's Beard RadioactiveWaste and r_wilcockson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldben Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 With debt that was restructured by a court, there are a lot of things that creditors worry about in a debt restructuring that are talked about in this paper. The first is when creditors who don't agree with the restructuring are forced to do so. This opens the door to abuse of the dissenting minority, and in particular, wealth transfers between creditors. When a restructuring is being worked out, a moratorium is put in place. This could be used by managers to keep businesses alive that aren't viable, or managers of a viable business could "shake off" liabilities that the business can afford to pay. It also raises concerns for existing creditors about how well they will be protected by new provisions meant to encourage the financing of financially troubled businesses, especially those that prefer new lenders to existing creditors, such as banks. There are limits on creditors' rights that the court can and should keep an eye on. It should also make sure there is a good balance between saving the company and protecting the interests of small creditors. The English court's present role is vital in preventing creditor tyranny. The court must ensure that procedural criteria for restructuring are completed, including protections for creditors. But the position is more than that. For example, when a creditor seeks to enforce its rights in spite of the stay, the court may be asked to weigh the interests of an individual creditor with the interests of all creditors. To maintain effective creditor protection, creditors should not be worse off after a reorganisation than they would be if no restructuring occurred. For example, if a creditor's security is overridden but they are provided monthly cash payments instead, is this need satisfied? Even if the Insolvency Service's 2016 suggestions are enacted, the English courts must do more to address these problems. RadioactiveWaste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 14 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said: Oh yes ? Show them some of that famous Derby hospitality. Royal Derby Hospitality. Ram-Alf, jimtastic56 and Ewetube 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 I assume the secret supporters meeting has finished now? David Graham Brown 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodypecker Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 (edited) 57 minutes ago, Yani P said: No players to be sold before transfer deadline has to be the best news. You're disregarding any player wishes, though, on contract offers that might arrive, and also the size of any possible late bids for a player / players(s) which Q would be duty-bound to consider for reasons of DCFC solvency. We can hope and even expect the squad to be the same next Tuesday but no-one can 100% guarantee that... Edited January 28, 2022 by Woodypecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Durden Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 Who are we going to fast track the legal decision with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 minute ago, tinman said: I assume the secret supporters meeting has finished now? Ssshhh. It's a secret. jimtastic56 and GenBr 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angieram Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 26 minutes ago, ollycutts1982 said: Nearly 500 pages. I'm on page 509. That's how many posts we have had to delete- 9 pages worth! ollycutts1982, RadioactiveWaste, Ram-Alf and 4 others 1 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Tyler Durden said: Who are we going to fast track the legal decision with? Coming up after the break, a persecuted and victimised football club vs A host of evil greedy b***ards. RadioactiveWaste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimtastic56 Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, angieram said: I'm on page 509. That's how many posts we have had to delete- 9 pages worth! That’s a hell of a lot of boob pics BucksRam 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angieram Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 Just now, jimtastic56 said: That’s a hell of a lot of boob pics If only that was all we had to contend with! ? Ewetube, Mucker1884 and RadioactiveWaste 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24Charlie Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 So we’ve had MPs meeting the EFL and Admins, councillors and BAWT meeting Mel and all we know for a fact is that Wayne told us Lawrence is staying. Why isn’t anyone ITK passing on the info they promised? RadioactiveWaste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 4 minutes ago, angieram said: If only that was all we had to contend with! ? Libel libel liable offensive slur libel argument that my libelous statement wasn't libelous more libel offensive slur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 7 minutes ago, angieram said: If only that was all we had to contend with! ? If it was, I'd be a lot more up to date with this thread, I promise you. OohMartWright and angieram 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now