High Court Date and Time

[Randy Marsh]

"H & G rushed out of court in black bags after suffering heart attacks"

 

If Carlsberg did twitter updates...

[Red Nick]

Broughton has an obligation to act in the best interest of the shareholders as well as the creditors. So hicks is saying that he looked after the creditors (rbs) but not the shareholders by not considering Mill Financial offer and accepting the nesv bid.

 

Thats it in one and Hicks is actually right for once from a legal point of view.

 

However because of the undertakings he gave I dont think he can stop the sale but look to get his financial loss compensated for the collusion between the LFC board and RBS which was a way of orchestrating that the best financial offer wasnt accepted and therefore they didnt look after the shareholders interest

[lifetime fan]

Yes. they are also behind peter lim's (extremely late) bid for the club.

 

No they are not.

 

Lim has been refered to in court as Meriton.

 

Mill Financial are a seperate 'interest' in the club.

[GJM]

This judgment today is not about whether Broughton chose the right owner, but whether he acted legally. H&G's claim is that he did not because: a) he never involved all board members and b) he didn't fully consider other bids.

 

I think that both are irrelevant to the judgment at hand - did Broughton act in a way that he was invested to do so?

 

It seems pretty clear that he did.

[TheResonator]

Sincerely hope the fact that they tried to sack Purslow & Ayre to bring in two patsies won't be forgotten. They can argue all they want about how Broughton didn't look after them enough, but that in itself is pretty convincing evidence that they were trying to prevent any sale.

[kelster]

I don't think it matters at all whether H&G were kept informed - if indeed that is true. The Board needed a majority vote to sell the club, and Broughton was the only who had the power to reconstitute the board.

 

There was a majority vote - Purslow, Ayre and Broughton's vote make it utterly irrelevant what H&G would have done or what their view is - and the pathetic attempt by Hicks to get rid of Ayre and Purslow was not legal.

 

They are clutching at the flimsiest of straws here, I think.

 

That's not quite how it is done is it though. What they are saying is probably a pack of lies, but the principle of attending a board meeting and be allowed to put your case and change the minds of other board members seems entirely reasonable.

[Trumo]

I'm still waiting for H&G's representation to be revealed as based on a false crop report for the frozen concentrated orange juice market.

[Red Nick]

This judgment today is not about whether Broughton chose the right owner, but whether he acted legally. H&G's claim is that he did not because: a) he never involved all board members and b) he didn't fully consider other bids.

 

I think that both are irrelevant to the judgment at hand - did Broughton act in a way that he was invested to do so?

 

It seems pretty clear that he did.

 

Unless Hicks wins this case they cannot reconsider the bids as they have made a binding contract to sell the club.

 

If the Judge did make it a legal requirement then they might have to have another meeting to reconsider all bids but they could set a deadline of the end of the week which is when RBS can put us into administration.

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

Thats it in one and Hicks is actually right for once from a legal point of view.

 

However because of the undertakings he gave I dont think he can stop the sale but look to get his financial loss compensated for the collusion between the LFC board and RBS which was a way of orchestrating that the best financial offer wasnt accepted and therefore they didnt look after the shareholders interest

 

When Broughton first took over as Chairman, he made a statement about selling to the best potential new owner of the club, not necessarily the highest bid - if this has been on public record for the last 6 months or so, then surely their argument is fucked??

[TheHitman]

Maybe their brief will come out with new tactics after the break and go all out attack. Hopefully our defence will perform better than the team has done this season.

[GJM]

So the judge could maybe ask Broughton & co to reconsider all the bids again in the worse case scenario. I then assume the board will say if that is the case then the club will go into administration hence the need for a judgment asap.

 

I really don't see how he can, at least not on the basis of the discussion in court today. Making a judgment about whether a bid was 'properly' considered or not will take a lot longer than a couple of hours.

 

In any case, that is not the issue at stake. The issue is simply whether Broughton acted within his powers. The fact that Hicks had to try to remove Ayres and Purslow in a pathetic last minute attempt to block the sale suggests very strongly that he did. If he was not, then Hicks would not have had to resort to such laughable tactics.

[alonso14]

Who are people following on twitter for the updates?

[Carra_is_legend]

When Broughton first took over as Chairman, he made a statement about selling to the best potential new owner of the club, not necessarily the highest bid - if this has been on public record for the last 6 months or so, then surely their argument is fucked??

 

Unfortunately courts only look at what happens in front of the judge, arguments, proofs etc.

[Red Nick]

When Broughton first took over as Chairman, he made a statement about selling to the best potential new owner of the club, not necessarily the highest bid - if this has been on public record for the last 6 months or so, then surely their argument is fucked??

 

Watch this space

 

That ones for the lawyers to sort out.

[Rafa_The_Gaffa]

1.10pm: Over lunch we will try to analyse what has been argued this morning. And clear up who is actually bidding for Liverpool Football Club.

 

Contrary to earlier impressions, it would seem that Meriton and Mill Financial are not the same bidder. It is believed that Peter Lim and Meriton are, in fact, the same bidder. I have amended earlier copy to reflect this.

 

Mill Financial are understood to still be involved, but it is unclear in what capacity.

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

Unfortunately courts only look at what happens in front of the judge, arguments, proofs etc.

 

ye'd reckon for him to make such a statement 6 months ago on taking the job, that there may have been such contractual stipulations as part of his taking on the role

[23CARRAGOLD]

Who are people following on twitter for the updates?

 

Guardian are doing a good one.

[Red Nick]

I really don't see how he can, at least not on the basis of the discussion in court today. Making a judgment about whether a bid was 'properly' considered or not will take a lot longer than a couple of hours.

 

In any case, that is not the issue at stake. The issue is simply whether Broughton acted within his powers. The fact that Hicks had to try to remove Ayres and Purslow in a pathetic last minute attempt to block the sale suggests very strongly that he did. If he was not, then Hicks would not have had to resort to such laughable tactics.

 

In one

 

This hearing is about whether Hicks can revoke his undertakings was able to replace Ayres and Purslow before the board meeting to accept the offer went ahead

[Guest LFD]

This judgment today is not about whether Broughton chose the right owner, but whether he acted legally. H&G's claim is that he did not because: a) he never involved all board members and b) he didn't fully consider other bids.

 

I think that both are irrelevant to the judgment at hand - did Broughton act in a way that he was invested to do so?

 

It seems pretty clear that he did.

 

Spot on.

[thompsonsnose]

When Broughton first took over as Chairman, he made a statement about selling to the best potential new owner of the club, not necessarily the highest bid - if this has been on public record for the last 6 months or so, then surely their argument is fucked??

 

Yup.

[The Party Boy]

The fact Hicks legal team is using that Peter Lim offer as evidence points to him being dodgy as fuck or in cahoots with the yanks. Manc pig

[Trumo]

That's not quite how it is done is it though. What they are saying is probably a pack of lies, but the principle of attending a board meeting and be allowed to put your case and change the minds of other board members seems entirely reasonable.

 

How about the fact their representatives are bringing up purported interest from Mill Financial as well as trying to big up the Meriton bid? It suggests they are presenting this as new info in the courtroom instead of discussing it with the board. That is, the very same board who asked them to sit in a meeting last week to discuss other bids, to which they flatly refused. Unless they are still going to argue that the board had been reconstituted.

 

H&G's representatives are going round in circles which to me suggests a motive to buy time to cook up something. I still mention Gillett because it's not 100% clear he's out of the loop, just because Mill Financial are being mentioned.

[The Dude Abides]

I'm pleading the fifth.

[gkmacca]

The hysteria on RAWK is ridiculous. Someone was following H&G's arguments and said 'This doesn't sound good'. It's not supposed to sound good! If you've hired a decent enough legal team, even if you have a lousy case, your arguments should sound worrying - ask OJ Simpson!

[TheHowieLama]

I believe it will be fairly straightforward for Broughton to suggest that the timing of the other bids made them unfeasible. He would be acting in both the clubs, creditors AND shareholders best interest by insuring above all else that the club did not chance going into admin. He will say that the others were simply too late to be considered.