High Court Date and Time

[Wor Horse]

Why is it every day seems to start with bad rumours, then good news from the high courts, then just as night falls you get even more bad news and you go to bed wondering if your club will be in a workable state when you wake up the next morning...

 

I reckon it's all to do with time zones, they sleep when we're up and we sleep when they're plotting their shit.

 

We've got ALOT on our side, the court ruling, lawyers for RBS, NESV, us and Broughton. They've got an Australian company and Judge Judy.

 

All I hope is that Broughton/Purslow were right when they said re-financing had to go to a vote between the home team and the Yanks.

 

NESV have stuck by us through it all so Henry must be confident of a success, even with all the rumours of re-financing etc we've still got 2 rulings from the highest court in the land on our side.

 

It wasn't YOU HAVE UNTIL 4PM TOMORROW TO GET RE-FINANCE, it was YOU HAVE UNTIL 4PM TOMORROW TO LIFT THE TRO AND SELL THE CLUB. So hopefully they do just that and this is ONE FINAL pathetic attempt at the fat cunt trying to hold on.

 

NESV did tell the courts today they owned the club and then we got the ruling so the optimist in me, even though i'm shit scared is telling me i'll be reading good news tomorrow at 2pm. Then we can crack on with the Derby,

 

but fucking hell, i'm gonna do some praying tonight.

 

But on the advice of its lawyers, RBS refused to take Mill Financial’s money, insisting that the fund first acquire Tom Hicks’s 50 per cent stake in the club before it is allowed to redeem the club’s debt.

Sources close to RBS insisted last night that if Mill Financial can both acquire Hicks’s stake and put cash on the table to repay the debt, there is legally nothing that the bank will be able to do to stop the fund redeeming Liverpool’s debt and taking control of the club.

 

And that's filled me with optimism. I think RBS hate him, they want nothing to do with him.

[Dan Vito Corleone]

I have no proof at all. None whatsoever.

 

I was driving home from TLW Footy and my brain clicked. It's a hunch that's grown into suspicion and I would say I almost certainly expect him to escape. I could be totally, totally wrong with this today but it wasn't a risk I was willing to take.

[Pidge]

Lads and ladies, I have to go to bed. I have training tomorrow that I actually can not sack off, so my normal 10am starts will not be good enough. I don't know how much sleep I will get, but I am going to tear myself away from the laptop.

 

Keep strong, believe and good luck to all. This shit is going down.

 

YNWA.

[ternando_forres]

Surely if he manages to refinance there won't be a single Liverpool fan left with any doubt about what kind of creature this person is, making a potential boycott of Anfield easier? I can't imagine what it would do the players moral if he does, it would sink through the floor.

[rargh]

If Hicks refinances via an illegal TRO then the premier league should ban him - simple as. I can see this getting very messy.

 

Isn't he acting in breach of the TRO by actively seeking refinance while it is in place?

[Dan Vito Corleone]

My head hurts from all this legal eagle stuff.

 

All I know is that I don't trust that fat twat as far as I can throw him and he will have every angle covered.

[aladdinsane]

Surely if he manages to refinance there won't be a single Liverpool fan left with any doubt about what kind of creature this person is, making a potential boycott of Anfield easier? I can't imagine what it would do the players moral if he does, it would sink through the floor.

 

We should go serbian on his arse if he does. Seriously though, if they do refinance, there is absolutely no justification whatseover to give them one more penny.

[WaltonRed]

He doesnt give a fuck because he'll simply never come back to England ever again.

 

He's after two things, money for himself and to get us back for daring to fight him back.

 

Keep the faith.

[aladdinsane]

I've been reading up about his case with the texas rangers today and he fought tooth and nail with them too but ultimately lost. I'm jsut hoping it's because he's a natually stubborn cunt who can't accept defeat and not that he has any possiblity of salvaging this.

[Anubis]

As Woo has said elsewhere, even if we oust him tomorrow I'm inclined to keep kicking away at the fucker just to give him a lesson he won't forget.

[Ted]

Gutted I'm on nights. absolutely gutted. Not going to be able to sleep and attempt to forget about this tomorrow.

 

Nothing is ever fucking simple is it? Cunts.

[WrongIslander]

As Woo has said elsewhere, even if we oust him tomorrow I'm inclined to keep kicking away at the fucker just to give him a lesson he won't forget.

 

Oh we certainly shouldn't turn a blind eye to any of his dealings in the future. He's fucked with the wrong club this time.

 

"It's debatable if Chairman Mao could have organised a greater show of red strength...."

[PaulMcC]

I'm goin gout to get drunk soon.

 

Not gonna enjoy it with all this going on.

[aladdinsane]

As Woo has said elsewhere, even if we oust him tomorrow I'm inclined to keep kicking away at the fucker just to give him a lesson he won't forget.

 

Indeed. Keep it up and then continute to send him a warm reminder every christmas and birthday.

[Wor Horse]

Gutted I'm on nights. absolutely gutted. Not going to be able to sleep and attempt to forget about this tomorrow.

 

Nothing is ever fucking simple is it? Cunts.

 

Said that to a mate today, nothing's ever simple following Liverpool. We always win stuff the hard way.

[Manny]

As Woo has said elsewhere, even if we oust him tomorrow I'm inclined to keep kicking away at the fucker just to give him a lesson he won't forget.

 

Agreed. There was a time when I'd be glad to see the back of him and we could just focus on the football again. Now - after his petty and arrogant little magistrate trick? I won't be happy until he's sucking off tramps to get a 20p cup of coffee, and curls up dead on a park bench in Houston. The fat, malignant, odious cunt.

[Wor Horse]

be wise to follow this dude tomorrow, he'll be at the hearing. He's a red and a lawyer, seems genuine.

Twitter

 

Like his latest tweet no judge likes to be played

[RedKnight]

His slapdash approach up until now shows he's clueless. He's obsessed with a valuation in a magazine with regards to the price of the club, blatantly ignoring the debt he loaded on it. He has no idea about football, he jumped on the gravy train with that midget thinking that a big premier league club being sold by an idiot with a muzzy was easy pickings for them both. They thought they could take a load out and put nothing in, then the global credit problems began and it looked like they would have to start dipping into their own pockets. But the greedy twat didn't want to, and he thought he could ride it out, whilst still taking money for himself.

 

He is a greedy old man who's played all his cards. He's up against people who are more informed on such matters and against new owners who run a franchise where you can't pull the shit he's done. He could have sold it, he got greedy and now he'll pay. What's his plan? Refinance and hold on for a higher bidder but with a big debt owed to someone else? The boycott would be huge if he pulled that shit now, he's done and he's resorted to lying to a tin pot court in Texas.

 

You are fucked, Tom. Accept it, and do you know what? I hope you it haunts you to your last days.

[aiyic]

Head not hurting yet?

Sports Illustrated Article by Michael McCann

 

Liverpool sale dispute could hinge on the removal of restraining order

 

 

 

Can a Texas court block a British court from allowing the sale of Liverpool FC to the owners of the Boston Red Sox? If that sounds like a strange question, it's because it concerns a curious mix of conflicts of law, international banking law, and the fate of one of soccer's most storied franchises. It is also a question that could lead to a legal showdown at 7 a.m. Friday, Texas time.

 

As of now, the ownership and control of Liverpool remain in dispute, with different conclusions reached by courts in Great Britain and Texas and with resulting uncertainty over the enforcement of conflicting judgments. The core dispute centers on an ownership group led by former Texas Rangers owner and Texas native Tom Hicks and his partner George Gillett. The group insists that the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) which loaned the group money, and the Liverpool board consisting of chairman Martin Broughton and directors Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre, lack the legal authority to sell Liverpool to the Red Sox-owning New England Sports Ventures (NESV).

 

As part of the loan agreement, RBS obtained extensive -- but now disputed -- authority over Liverpool's financial decisions. Hicks insists that RBS wrongly prevented his group from selling the team for nearly $1 billion, which would have enabled the group to payback what it owed and pocket significant sale monies. RBS has instead sought to sell the team to NESV for $476 million, a less lucrative amount, but an amount from an ownership group that has guided the Red Sox to two World Series victories. Hicks' group is obligated to repay RBS and another lender, Wells Fargo, $453 million by Friday Oct. 15.

 

In the past week, Hicks unsuccessfully sought to use the London High Court to block RBS from selling Liverpool. The Texas native then turned to a court in a much more familiar setting. On Wednesday he sought and obtained a temporary restraining order from a Texas State court that, at least according to the Texas court, prevents RBS from selling Liverpool to NESV.

 

In his application for the order, Hicks charged that RBS deceived him and, despite contractual obligations, did not seek to obtain fair market value of Liverpool. In a move that has struck some RBS supporters as designed to help out the hometown guy, Texas Judge Jim Jordan granted the order. Jordan concluded that he had jurisdiction over the matter, even though Liverpool, its employees, coaches, and staff all play in Great Britain and do not play in the United States -- let alone Texas -- and even though the financier of the team is based in London. A hearing on the temporary order was originally scheduled for Oct. 25 and since rescheduled for Oct. 15.

 

On the other side of the Atlantic, RBS claims that the Texas decision does not govern a transaction that, its view, lacks any credible connection to Texas. RBS also maintains that in seeking the order, Hicks failed to inform Jordan of crucial pieces of information.

 

Instead of listening to a Texas court, RBS finds the British court system to be determinative. That is because London High Court Judge Christopher Floyd issued an order today essentially telling RBS to ignore Jordan's temporary restraining order and telling Hicks that he must accept the British court's decision by 4 p.m. London Time (10 a.m. Texas Time) tomorrow.

 

Which court is right?

Treaties between countries often provide insight over how to resolve conflicts of laws among court decisions in different countries. The United States and Great Britain, however, lack a general agreement as to the enforcement of judicial judgments. Treaties are unlikely to answer to solve this particular dispute.

 

A better source of law may be the wording of the lending agreements between RBS and Hicks' group. Some of the agreements may possess "choice of law" provisions, which dictate which country's laws resolve certain types of disputes. While a choice of law provision would not necessarily prevent another country's court from hearing a dispute, and may not contemplate disputes that trigger temporary restraining orders, it could nonetheless signal whether British or Texas law is determinative. That insight would then be used by both the British and Texas courts to best resolve their conflicting judgments.

 

Interestingly, at least one of the lending agreements between RBS and Hicks references jurisdiction. The Liverpool Company Articles refer to British courts as having jurisdiction in any winding up or dissolution of the team. The agreement does not, however, expressly state that such law is exclusive.

 

The best strategy for RBS and NESV is probably to convince Judge Jordan to remove, or decline to extend, the temporary injunction. According to reports, they have hired lawyers in Texas to do just that. Preliminary injunctions are typically difficult to have removed before formal hearings. At a hearing, RBS will likely argue that Hicks sought the restraining order in a deceptive way, since he purportedly neglected to mention to Judge Jordan that there had been a conflicting ruling on this case in England that very morning.

 

Hicks and his lawyers would have an opportunity to respond. They might argue, for instance, that because RBS did not seek maximum value for its sale, the British ruling derives from fraudulent behavior on the part of RBS. The Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, which Texas has adopted, stipulates that a U.S. court may not uphold a foreign judgment if it arises through fraud.

 

Hicks' lawyers could also employ arguments that are grounded in public policy, with a key U.S. commercial policy being that owners -- such as Hicks -- are free to sell their companies to whomever they choose and that RBS, a lending institution, should not be able to take Hicks' shoes as owner.

 

What happens if RBS succeeds in terminating the injunction?

The conflict of law would be removed and the London High court's holding would proceed. The sale of Liverpool to NESV would therefore take place.

 

In that outcome, Hicks could then try to identify a viable source of appeal for the London High Court's consideration. Given the High Court's clear holdings in favor of RBS, though, it seems unlikely that Hicks would find much support in that approach.

 

Hicks could also seek a temporary restraining order in Massachusetts, as NESV is based in Boston. By that point, however, a Massachusetts court may be unwilling to interfere with the transaction. It is also unclear that the lending agreements between Hicks and RBS allow for Massachusetts courts to hear contractual disputes.

What would happen if RBS fails to persuade Judge Jordan to remove the injunction?

RBS would then likely seek an appeal in the Texas court system. An appeal could take weeks to be heard. During that time, ownership of Liverpool would be in limbo and Hicks might insist that he is not obligated to repay the loan until the litigation is resolved.

 

RBS and NESV could instead ignore Judge Jordan's decision to continue the injunction. Doing so, however, could motivate Jordan to find RBS officials, and possibly those of NESV, in contempt of court. Ignoring a judge's order is virtually always a regrettable idea.

 

Other scenarios

There are still two other possibilities:

First, RBS and Hicks could reach a last-second contractual settlement that removes the litigation from British and Texas courts. A settlement would provide closure and certainty. Still, given the impending deadline and the deeply soured relations between RBS and Hicks, a settlement seems unlikely.

 

Second, Hicks could manage to repay his loan before tomorrow's deadline and thereby retake control of the team. In that situation, however, NESV could then seek a temporary restraining order to block RBS from discharging the loan, which it would be obligated to do if Hicks repays. NESV could maintain that Hicks had wrongfully prevented the sale of Liverpool before his repaying of the loan.

 

By Friday, we'll know more about how this dizzying sports dispute could be resolved or become even more complex.

 

Michael McCann is a law professor and Sports Law Institute director at Vermont Law School and the distinguished visiting Hall of Fame Professor of Law at Mississippi College School of Law. He also teaches a sports law reading group at Yale Law School.

Edited October 15, 2010 by aiyic

[redinoz]

The Australian news site Sydney Morning Herald - Business & World News Australia | smh.com.au used to have a feature that you could submit your own news, and since bugger all happens that is newsworthy you'd get all sorts of garbage popping up so that the site stays "fresh".

 

The Macquarie Bank involvement would be a great angle to let them know about, although I cannot find where to submit events on the site anymore. I'll keep looking and let you know. If enough people bombard the site that would put pressure on the bank to rethink, even if Craig gets annoyed and says otherwise.

[Ted]

Good stuff.

[Jack the Sipper]

Why is it every day seems to start with bad rumours, then good news from the high courts, then just as night falls you get even more bad news and you go to bed wondering if your club will be in a workable state when you wake up the next morning...

 

I reckon it's all to do with time zones, they sleep when we're up and we sleep when they're plotting their shit.

 

We've got ALOT on our side, the court ruling, lawyers for RBS, NESV, us and Broughton. They've got an Australian company and Judge Judy.

All I hope is that Broughton/Purslow were right when they said re-financing had to go to a vote between the home team and the Yanks.

 

NESV have stuck by us through it all so Henry must be confident of a success, even with all the rumours of re-financing etc we've still got 2 rulings from the highest court in the land on our side.

 

It wasn't YOU HAVE UNTIL 4PM TOMORROW TO GET RE-FINANCE, it was YOU HAVE UNTIL 4PM TOMORROW TO LIFT THE TRO AND SELL THE CLUB. So hopefully they do just that and this is ONE FINAL pathetic attempt at the fat cunt trying to hold on.

 

NESV did tell the courts today they owned the club and then we got the ruling so the optimist in me, even though i'm shit scared is telling me i'll be reading good news tomorrow at 2pm. Then we can crack on with the Derby,

 

but fucking hell, i'm gonna do some praying tonight.

 

But on the advice of its lawyers, RBS refused to take Mill Financial’s money, insisting that the fund first acquire Tom Hicks’s 50 per cent stake in the club before it is allowed to redeem the club’s debt.

Sources close to RBS insisted last night that if Mill Financial can both acquire Hicks’s stake and put cash on the table to repay the debt, there is legally nothing that the bank will be able to do to stop the fund redeeming Liverpool’s debt and taking control of the club.

 

And that's filled me with optimism. I think RBS hate him, they want nothing to do with him.

 

I wouldn't say that RBS are on our side really. They just want their money back. Over the last week they've sided with us (Broughton, Purslow, Ayre) because they believed a sale to NESV represented the most viable means of getting their cash. If Hicks gets the cash tomorrow to pay the debt on terms the board can't block (as I understand it, they can only block deals which involve using club assets) then I see no real reason why they won't take it (or even if they'd be allowed to refuse it). I don't think bankers are the types to take things personally and refuse to deal on that basis - as with Hicks, money is their master.

 

I also doubt that NESV are the owners of the club in any legally binding way. I know Henry and his lawyers have claimed this, but notably, none of the LFC directers has confirmed it to my knowledge; last nights club statement said only that they had "resolved to complete the sale", until the Texas injunction "regrettably... prevented the transaction being completed." If so, then NESV can't stop it either. And the High Court ruling could prove to be pretty meaningless. Sure, the Texias judge will withdraw the injunction tomorrow (if Hicks dosen't withdraw it first), but it would have served its purpose if the delay it created gave Hicks the extra two days needed to complete a deal. The fact that NESV's lawyers requested that the High Court judge order Hicks to withdraw the injunction tonight (which was refused) is very telling, for it suggests NESV were all too aware of what Hicks was up to - and therefore suggests they not nearly as assured of their own legal position re the sale as they've claimed.

 

What's keeping me going is the fact that, if Hicks can buy out the debt legally, then he could've done this ages ago. Yet he hasn't been able to get the money. Clearly, no-one wants to lend him the money without the guarantee that the assets would provide - but which he can't use. People have suggested Lim could offer him the money. True, but again, he could've offered him it before, and either chose not to, or couldn't because the board do have more control over where Hicks gets his money from than I suspect.

[Red Phoenix]

Good read that aiyic, clears a decent bit of the confusion up, thanks.

[Randy Marsh]

I work tomorrow and really need to get my head down but I can't pull myself from the laptop.

 

I agree with what Agent Prov is saying. We all knew that Tom Hicks was a hard nosed bastard, but the events of the past couple of days have proven just how determined that cunt is to fuck us up. I didn't think even he would go to the lengths that he has done to prevent the one thing this club has needed since the day he rode in to town.

 

If something smells fishy with Hicks, then that's because it is and the cunt is up to something. We can be 100% sure that tonight this bastard will be trawling through every law book in the land to find even the smallest of loopholes to block proceedings further, searching the four corners of the globe cap in hand for an obscure financial institution willing to lend him a few quid.

 

This mickey mouse ruling is designed to buy him time, pure and simple. It's a total and utter disgrace that he's succeeded in doing that, but he has done for a few more hours at least. In that time he'll be trying to cook up one more swizz to keep his fat greasey hands clinging on to the club, you can be sure of that. It's up to us now to do the one thing we can do that we know makes a difference and get behind KopFaithful's attempts to identify and target ANYONE who could be assisting him. The emails work. They make a difference. We seen that with Blackstone, and we're seeing it with the arsey replies we're already receiving from some jumped up kangaroo shagging twat in an office down under. Keep sending them, it could me the difference between us having new owners tomorrow night and us still being stuck with this cancerous parasite.

 

I actually think that he'll still ultimately lose in all of this, but it still gives me great cause for concern. Our legal system is ready to come down on him like a tonne of bricks, and if this Texan court has any bollocks and credibility about it, it too will come down hard on the cunt tomorrow. Lying, deception, misrepresentation. Sadly you can get away with lying to fans and banks, but not to the courts Tom. Not to the British High Court in London, and hopefully not to a district court in Texas. Not only should they blast to pieces his little injunction tomorrow, they should also throw the book at the cunt for his arrogant disgusting behaviour over the past few days, which has disregarded and made a total mockery of two country's legal systems. If there's any justice in the world, it won't be the 100million quid he's short of that will be worrying him this time tomorrow night, it'll be the serious legal charges over his head.

 

Here's my take on it anyway:

 

He's beaten, he knows he's beaten, but he's too stubborn to accept that. The legal stuff seems to stack heavily in our favour and every commentator and expert see this latest episode as nothing more than a final act of desperation, a delaying of the inevitable. We've got top top people fighting our's and RBS's corner here, people with power and influence who'll relish taking Fat Tom to the cleaners. He lost another team in court a few months back and seemingly went down the exact same route of being an arse there too. The court tomorrow will over turn his case, and by granting the hearing beginning at 7am, they're already putting in place a necessary time frame for us to complete a sale in the necessary time required. If/when this get's over turned, I can honestly see the sale being announced within minutes. They will be good to go now, everything will be in place and all that will be needed is a green light. There won't be any delay in pushing that through should we get the legal clearance.

 

That's my optimistic approach to it anyway. I don't doubt for a second he'll be conspiring to produce a rabbit from the hat tonight, but he's a dead man walking now. Here's hoping and praying that Shanks, Bob and the 96 are looking down on us tomorrow and they pull a few strings and give us the break that this club needs so much.

 

YNWA

[gingerhulk]

I work tomorrow and really need to get my head down but I can't pull myself from the laptop.

 

I agree with what Agent Prov is saying. We all knew that Tom Hicks was a hard nosed bastard, but the events of the past couple of days have proven just how determined that cunt is to fuck us up. I didn't think even he would go to the lengths that he has done to prevent the one thing this club has needed since the day he rode in to town.

 

If something smells fishy with Hicks, then that's because it is and the cunt is up to something. We can be 100% sure that tonight this bastard will be trawling through every law book in the land to find even the smallest of loopholes to block proceedings further, searching the four corners of the globe cap in hand for an obscure financial institution willing to lend him a few quid.

 

This mickey mouse ruling is designed to buy him time, pure and simple. It's a total and utter disgrace that he's succeeded in doing that, but he has done for a few more hours at least. In that time he'll be trying to cook up one more swizz to keep his fat greasey hands clinging on to the club, you can be sure of that. It's up to us now to do the one thing we can do that we know makes a difference and get behind KopFaithful's attempts to identify and target ANYONE who could be assisting him. The emails work. They make a difference. We seen that with Blackstone, and we're seeing it with the arsey replies we're already receiving from some jumped up kangaroo shagging twat in an office down under. Keep sending them, it could me the difference between us having new owners tomorrow night and us still being stuck with this cancerous parasite.

 

I actually think that he'll still ultimately lose in all of this, but it still gives me great cause for concern. Our legal system is ready to come down on him like a tonne of bricks, and if this Texan court has any bollocks and credibility about it, it too will come down hard on the cunt tomorrow. Lying, deception, misrepresentation. Sadly you can get away with lying to fans and banks, but not to the courts Tom. Not to the British High Court in London, and hopefully not to a district court in Texas. Not only should they blast to pieces his little injunction tomorrow, they should also throw the book at the cunt for his arrogant disgusting behaviour over the past few days, which has disregarded and made a total mockery of two country's legal systems. If there's any justice in the world, it won't be the 100million quid he's short of that will be worrying him this time tomorrow night, it'll be the serious legal charges over his head.

 

Here's my take on it anyway:

 

He's beaten, he knows he's beaten, but he's too stubborn to accept that. The legal stuff seems to stack heavily in our favour and every commentator and expert see this latest episode as nothing more than a final act of desperation, a delaying of the inevitable. We've got top top people fighting our's and RBS's corner here, people with power and influence who'll relish taking Fat Tom to the cleaners. He lost another team in court a few months back and seemingly went down the exact same route of being an arse there too. The court tomorrow will over turn his case, and by granting the hearing beginning at 7am, they're already putting in place a necessary time frame for us to complete a sale in the necessary time required. If/when this get's over turned, I can honestly see the sale being announced within minutes. They will be good to go now, everything will be in place and all that will be needed is a green light. There won't be any delay in pushing that through should we get the legal clearance.

 

That's my optimistic approach to it anyway. I don't doubt for a second he'll be conspiring to produce a rabbit from the hat tonight, but he's a dead man walking now. Here's hoping and praying that Shanks, Bob and the 96 are looking down on us tomorrow and they pull a few strings and give us the break that this club needs so much.

YNWA

 

Brilliant post!

 

Lets hope so mate.