Club Statement on C&A

[FrenchEyeGlass]

Statement from Liverpool FC - Liverpool FC

The following statement has been released by Liverpool Football Club:

 

In October 2010, Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited ("Liverpool FC") was sold to the Fenway Sports Group.

 

As a consequence of that sale, Thomas Hicks and George Gillett (being the former owners of Liverpool FC) made a number of allegations and claims against Sir Martin Broughton, Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre (being the company directors responsible for the sale of Liverpool FC to the Fenway Sports Group). Those allegations and claims were denied by Messrs Broughton, Purslow and Ayre.

 

The allegations, claims and denials resulted in legal proceedings being commenced.

 

The parties have now agreed a settlement (the terms of which are confidential). All claims and allegations made against Messrs Broughton, Purslow and Ayre have been withdrawn by Messrs Hicks and Gillett and all legal proceedings between the parties concluded.

 

The parties will not be making any further statement to the press.

 

I hope to god we haven't paid these cunts any money.

[King Emlyn]

They clearly have

[FrenchEyeGlass]

They clearly have

 

But have we? Wasn't the case against Broughton, Purslow et al and not Liverpool FC/FSG?

[King Emlyn]

Not sure, but as they were acting for us you can be sure we'll be footing the bill.

[Reacher]

Not as cut and dried as we thought it was then?

[fin-bat]

Soon to follow, an apology from behalf of LFC to all parties involved in this case...

[Cij]

Based on the progress of the case to date, the most likely outcome is that the parties agreed to walk away 'back to back' with each side bearing their own costs.

 

Hicks & Gillette could not come up with the necessary funds as 'security for costs' and the Court prevented them from kicking the can further down the road by way of an adjournment. The Toxic Twins were therefore in a fairly desperate position and the defendants' lawyers would have exploited this weakness.

 

It is most unlikely that the club opted to make a financial payment to the plaintiffs as it was not directly involved in the action and the defendants did not appear to be in any danger of coming unstuck. Great news that Cancer & Aids are now just an embarrassing footnote in our club's history.

[Marko121]

I think it might have been a case of if it costs us x amount to fight the case, why don't we just give them y amount and tell them to fuck off

[RedinSweden]

Based on the progress of the case to date, the most likely outcome is that the parties agreed to walk away 'back to back' with each side bearing their own costs.

 

Hicks & Gillette could not come up with the necessary funds as 'security for costs' and the Court prevented them from kicking the can further down the road by way of an adjournment. The Toxic Twins were therefore in a fairly desperate position and the defendants' lawyers would have exploited this weakness.

 

It is most unlikely that the club opted to make a financial payment to the plaintiffs as it was not directly involved in the action and the defendants did not appear to be in any danger of coming unstuck. Great news that Cancer & Aids are now just an embarrassing footnote in our club's history.

 

Yep, that's how I read it.

[Rambo]

There is no way hicks and gillet could keep their mouths shut if they made a profit... Their egos would mean they'd have to shout it from the Statue of Liberty...so it must have been a draw.

[xerxes]

Frustratingly much of the intrigue will remain a mystery.

 

It is easy to see how Broughton, Purslow and Ayre, employees of LFC, owned by G&H, could have been seen by G&H not to have acted in G&H’s best personal interests.

 

Ayre has demonstrated no capacity to conspire to do anything and is best parked in this equation. I suspect that G&H will have felt that Broughton was less than even handed with them as an honest independent broker. He is a man who gets things done, extricating G&H from LFC was never going to be easy, or clean.

 

Purslow remains the real character of interest. His withering contempt for G&H was clear in the infamous SOS interview. Broughton credited him with doing much of the key work in the putsch which saw them leave. He was undoubtedly a fan. He was also demonstrably a credible financial figure. But his behaviour as MD was at times unwise, naive and unbalanced.

 

What is certain is that Broughton’s time at LFC, although brief, was pivotal in our history

[fowler9]

"blow me fuckface I'm sick of you"

[Guest San Don]

Based on the progress of the case to date, the most likely outcome is that the parties agreed to walk away 'back to back' with each side bearing their own costs.

 

Hicks & Gillette could not come up with the necessary funds as 'security for costs' and the Court prevented them from kicking the can further down the road by way of an adjournment. The Toxic Twins were therefore in a fairly desperate position and the defendants' lawyers would have exploited this weakness.

 

It is most unlikely that the club opted to make a financial payment to the plaintiffs as it was not directly involved in the action and the defendants did not appear to be in any danger of coming unstuck. Great news that Cancer & Aids are now just an embarrassing footnote in our club's history.

 

This.

 

Frustratingly much of the intrigue will remain a mystery.

 

It is easy to see how Broughton, Purslow and Ayre, employees of LFC, owned by G&H, could have been seen by G&H not to have acted in G&H’s best personal interests.

 

Ayre has demonstrated no capacity to conspire to do anything and is best parked in this equation. I suspect that G&H will have felt that Broughton was less than even handed with them as an honest independent broker. He is a man who gets things done, extricating G&H from LFC was never going to be easy, or clean.

 

Purslow remains the real character of interest. His withering contempt for G&H was clear in the infamous SOS interview. Broughton credited him with doing much of the key work in the putsch which saw them leave. He was undoubtedly a fan. He was also demonstrably a credible financial figure. But his behaviour as MD was at times unwise, naive and unbalanced.

 

What is certain is that Broughton’s time at LFC, although brief, was pivotal in our history

 

Your continued ability to chat shit by the bucket load, continues to amaze me.

[Bobby Hundreds]

As long as they pay off isn't from club funds, this is FSGs purchase. Who am I kidding every single penny they have put in they are getting back, they have essentially just opened a savings account and put in three hundred million and left it while they do other things.

[Ranxerox]

they probably mentioned Suarez and "diabolical intent" thus C&A promptly withdrew

[Anubis]

Sounds to me like they've withdrawn their claim with all parties paying their own legal costs. Not unusual to see such a settlement end with a statement like that.

[rubble-rouser]

H & G have given up - simple. They lost their application to get the case adjourned recently and they will have been stronglyadvisedb their lawyers that their claims were garbage. They will have paid the costs of those hearings but probably no more than that.

[Gym Beglin]

I think it might have been a case of if it costs us x amount to fight the case, why don't we just give them y amount and tell them to fuck off

 

Exactamundo.

 

Lawyers can always find 'something' that we've done to breach something eventually, it's best to throw the cash at them, get them to sign to say they won't bring any more claims against us, and then confine them to the memories marked 'Aids'.

 

We're going through exactly the same process now with getting rid of a Chief Exec who was a nasty cunt. The cost of the investigation would likely be £250k, whereas the cost of the settlement is £125k. You can guess which way we're going.

[Harry Squatter]

Fucking parasites, hope they die as paupers

[bonesman]

Fifty-day Liverpool FC hearing averted as high-profile case settles

11 January 2013 | By Katy Dowell

Print

Email

Share

Comment

Save

The former owners of Liverpool Football Club Tom Hicks and George Gillett have settled their High Court battle with the club’s former board of directors and financier RBS.

 

 

The case was set down for a 50-day hearing in front of Mr Justice Peter Smith from April, with Clyde & Co partner Paul Friedman instructing 3 Verulam Buildings’ Ali Malek QC, Gregory Mitchell QC and 4 Stone Buildings’ Richard Hill QC for Hicks and Gillett.

 

In December the Court of Appeal refused to delay the start of the trial or vary an order for security for costs (8 January 2013). According to the CoA ruling, the claimants paid £712,000 on account securing the future of the case, half of what they had offered to pay by way of security.

 

 

Hicks and Gillett wanted a High Court declaration that the club’s former chairman Martin Broughton, managing director Christian Purslow and commercial director Ian Ayre had conspired with RBS to sell the club at a reduced price in 2010.

 

The pair had attempted to block the £300m sale to New England Sports Ventures (NESV) but the deal went ahead after the High Court found them to be in breach of an agreement with RBS that permitted Broughton to lead the sale process.

 

In his CoA ruling Lord Justice Lewison highlighted the ferocity of the battle stating that “the extraordinary volume of paper, the extravagantly long skeleton arguments, which more resemble the Michelin Man than skeletons, and the inordinate citation of authority are quite inappropriate for an application dealing principally with case management decisions”.

 

RBS has already spent in excess of £1m on legal costs associated with the case.

 

A statement released today stated: “The parties have now agreed a settlement (the terms of which are confidential). All claims and allegations made against Messrs Broughton, Purslow and Ayre have been withdrawn by Messrs Hicks and Gillett and all legal proceedings between the parties concluded.”

 

Monckton Chambers’ Paul Harris QC was instructed by Broughton, while Erskine Chambers’ Richard Snowden QC was instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partner Patrick Swain for RBS.

 

For more on this and other top cases see The Top Cases 2013,

 

The legal line-up

 

For the claimants Tom Hicks and George Gillett, and their respective companies: 3 Verulam Buildings’ Ali Malek QC and Gregory Mitchell QC, and 4 Stone Buildings’ Richard Hill QC leading 3 Verulam Buildings’ Christopher Harris and Sebastian Isaac of One Essex Court, instructed by Clyde & Co partner Paul Friedman.

 

For the defendants Broughton, Purslow and Ayre: Monckton Chambers’ Paul Harris QC and Serle Court’s Philip Marshall QC leading Monckton Chambers’ Owain Draper, instructed by Couchmans partner Satish Khandke and Enyo Law partner George Maling.

 

For the defendant RBS: Erskine Chambers’ Richard Snowden QC leading James Potts of the same set and Fountain Court’s Patrick Goodall, instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partner Patrick Swain.

 

For the defendant NESV: Erskine Chambers’ David Chivers QC leading Philip Gillyon, instructed by Shearman & Sterling partner Jo Rickard

 

Fifty-day Liverpool FC hearing averted as high-profile case settles | News | The Lawyer

[xerxes]

Your continued ability to chat shit by the bucket load, continues to amaze me.

Yours doesn't;)

[Dr Nowt]

James Pearce on Hicks and Gillett settlement: Line drawn under dark chapter in Liverpool FC's history - Liverpool FC News - Liverpool FC - Liverpool Echo

 

$1,000,000,000 damages claim, down to walking away with nothing. Epic dwindle.

[aws]

Sounds to me like they've withdrawn their claim with all parties paying their own legal costs. Not unusual to see such a settlement end with a statement like that.

 

Exactly. There's nothing in that statement which suggests they've received a penny.

[Aldonose]

James Pearce on Hicks and Gillett settlement: Line drawn under dark chapter in Liverpool FC's history - Liverpool FC News - Liverpool FC - Liverpool Echo

 

$1,000,000,000 damages claim, down to walking away with nothing. Epic dwindle.

 

The echo doesn't often state things as fact if they're not. It's reassuring to think they got diddly. Reading Tony Barrett's tweet before it looked like they'd gotten some kind of pay off from the club/directors at the time of the 'epic swindle'.

[Dr Nowt]

The echo doesn't often state things as fact if they're not. It's reassuring to think they got diddly. Reading Tony Barrett's tweet before it looked like they'd gotten some kind of pay off from the club/directors at the time of the 'epic swindle'.

 

Poetic that they appear to have backed down due to the familiar lack of funds and/or desire to cough them up. Perhaps they can find someone in Texas to help them sue each other on a 'No Win No Fee' basis.

 

Just thankful that now whenever they shoot themselves in the foot through a heady cocktail of greed, ego and buffoonery, we no longer suffer. For all we're still getting over the damage they did and have plenty of problems, them taking us into oblivion already feels like a pissed dream that went from seeming horribly real to being chuckled about having woken up.

 

Chin chin Duke and Duke, you may have fucked us but we left you in the end. We're not yet quite the catch we were before you came along, but we will be and have plenty of support in the meanwhile. You on the other hand are old, bloated and reviled. Fuckety bye.