Jambos_1874 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 So when do we actually get a ruling one way or the other? When will we definitvely know that we get compensation, retain Premiership status etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccarton3 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 (edited) Dundee United etc might actually be good thing. The judge must see how that shower at the SPFL have ****ed everything, not even seen the potential knock on effect of their actions when challenged by Hearts and Thistle. Edited July 1, 2020 by Riccarton3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMBO.LOU Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 As it’s on lunch break. Can we discuss now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hibsarepants Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 The DUFC defence (agreed with the SPFL no doubt) is as expected - don't correct the harm done to the Plaintiffs , by causing harm to us. The strategy of the SPFL is clear - block reconstruction and get way with the lowest compensation possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 1 minute ago, NANOJAMBO said: Judge has said it can continue tomorrow ( pm only) & Friday , mentions "complexity of submissions". Dundee United boy took too long basically. Wants the others to say how long they will need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 You were warned the court proceedings can be tedious and involve legal arguments over precedents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 17 minutes ago, jackal said: Dont think he has Doncasters number. That was a good one, made me laugh 😄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 1 minute ago, hibsarepants said: The DUFC defence (agreed with the SPFL no doubt) is as expected - don't correct the harm done to the Plaintiffs , by causing harm to us. The strategy of the SPFL is clear - block reconstruction and get way with the lowest compensation possible. Not really what he said. What he meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch41 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 I was on the audio 3 times and never heard anything from Hearts/Partick’s side. Have our side said anything yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Why were Dundee United first up? (Or close to it? I'm not listening in) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTT Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 So it looks like the SPFL are going to release premiership fixtures Monday. I suppose its shit or get off the pan time regarding the interdict right? Or if successful without the interdict can the Judge effectively nullify the fixture list ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilnunb Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Just now, mitch41 said: I was on the audio 3 times and never heard anything from Hearts/Partick’s side. Have our side said anything yet. Nope just the DU QC. Think Lord Clark couldn't wait to have a break! 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMBO.LOU Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Just now, Footballfirst said: You were warned the court proceedings can be tedious and involve legal arguments over precedents. is it wrong to be optimistic that the judge himself brought up the st Johnstone case. Then later asked what the sfa rules stated about bringing court action against the league at that time ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaliveits105 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Dundee United have stolen a watch and been caught but they want to keep the watch and punish the watch owner for complaining all seems fair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Just now, Footballfirst said: You were warned the court proceedings can be tedious and involve legal arguments over precedents. It was like a full hearing though. Judge seemed to be surprised it took so long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch41 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 1 minute ago, neilnunb said: Nope just the DU QC. Think Lord Clark couldn't wait to have a break! 🤣 Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whatsthefuture Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 15 hours ago, Sir Gio said: Culture shock awaits. Criminal trials can be dull for extended periods, contract law, well doesn't get duller. 3 minutes ago, 5-1Jambo said: SPFL had to be asked at the beginning of proceedings if they supported the DU request for arbitration because they had not filed a request on their submission. Tells you right away how arbitration would go. Judge suggested that there may not be time for arbritation. Lunch now and judge saying this is taking longer than first thought. This is likely to go on all week. DU playing for time in the knowledge that the court doesn't have time. Judge has just said after today he is only available tomorrow afternoon and Friday. This effectively goes against a significant part of the bore-lands argument that There is plenty of time to to take this to arbitration Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchies75 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Im wondering if the Dundee United QC is planning to talk until 1 August Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 33 minutes ago, neilnunb said: Judge said he might take overnight to decide how to proceed...just as well cos this DU boy is taking us to bedtime. Just want to allow us time to put our case forward without rushing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NANOJAMBO Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 On the basis that the QC for DUFC etc has all but complete (he needs another "10 minutes") , here's my take on what happened. QC for DUFC/Cove/Raith opened Hearts are wrong : they are "contractually bound to go to Arbitration" because the articles of SPFL & SFA require it as condition of membership. Judge asked if SFA could arbitrate in time for new season ? Borland said "yes" but if they don't do it in time it's not DUFCs fault - Hearts waited 2 months before launching court proceedings. Judge - hang on - there was talk of reconstruction ?! Borland QC - HMFC say "it's likely to be impractical/impossible to solve in arbitration - SPECIFICALLY , HMFC are acknowledging the time issue. Judge said - so what happens if it's not done in time for new start date ? Borland - HMFC acknwledge this cos they're seeking damages in that event. Hearts seem to be relying on a case of StJohnstone v SFA from 1965. Borland making a strong case this doesn't apply. Just because HMFC claim "unfair prejudice" doesn't mean it can't go to arbitration. In short, am was all about Hearts being wrong, they ought to be going to arbitration, their case is amongst other things "wrong" & "fanciful". Remains to be seen how HMFCs lawyers make case for no arbitration. These are my own views on what has transpired, I'm not a lawyer, no questions please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Potter Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 12 minutes ago, PhoenixHearts said: 2 hours in to this bloody phonecall, suppose it's a good time to ask.... How much is this actually costing me? Ooops☹️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busby1985 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Why didn’t we speak first? It’s our case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzyonthefence Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 6 minutes ago, wavydavy said: I saw a report in the Daily Record the other day where the article clearly stated that due to the fact that less games would be played in the Championship it would be unfair to promote a club and therefore there would be no relegation either. This was/is to be part of the SPFL discussion today. The strange things was that when I copied and pasted the article the part about the number of games etc had miraculouslt fanished. One other poster on here backed me up as he had read the very same thing. It seems that they were either not meant to have published that part or were hastily asked to remove it by someone. All very strange. How the **** can they argue that it is unfair to promote or relegate due to smaller number of games yet they’ve done precisely that?! What’s the point in even playing or fans paying to watch this coming season if they do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTT Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 3 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said: Dundee United have stolen a watch and been caught but they want to keep the watch and punish the watch owner for complaining all seems fair Thats actually a really good analogy. The only right and proper thing to do is to hand the watch back. Its not theirs to keep. Their issue should be with the SPFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavydavy Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 13 minutes ago, PhoenixHearts said: 2 hours in to this bloody phonecall, suppose it's a good time to ask.... How much is this actually costing me? £1 per minute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Just now, mitch41 said: I was on the audio 3 times and never heard anything from Hearts/Partick’s side. Have our side said anything yet. No. The next to speak will be the SPFL's QC Gerry Moynihan, before Hearts/PT get the chance to put forward their own arguments and rebut or refute what has been said earlier. The QC for Dundee Utd/Raith/Cove has done exactly the same thing by seeking to dismantle Hearts/PTs arguments. You need to listen to both sides of the argument before making any judgements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Laff Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 4 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said: Dundee United have stolen a watch and been caught but they want to keep the watch and punish the watch owner for complaining all seems fair You mean they’ve been given a stolen watch and complaining they shouldn’t give it back as it was almost theres anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccarton3 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 This is curious. Like the judge has been on the moon. Christ, this is not some wee case, . How did he think it would pan out? Surprised at the complexity? Wait til! He heard the petitioners. What is his preparation? Would it not make sense to restrict the presentations to an allotted time? Get a sense of how the participants are likely to operate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5-1Jambo Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 So far DU have only argued the case for arbritation obviously knowing it won't go our way. If their request is granted the our case against the SPFL won't be heard, is my understanding if today's gearing. The judge did ask if there was time for proper arbritation of to take place before the 1zt of August to which DU said yes. The judge then asked what would happen if Hearts won their case at arbritation. The DU QC had to admit that the start of the league may have to be held up but it would be the fault of Hearts and Partick because they waited so long to file this case. DU QC suggested that this should have been done at the beginning of June. Judge reminded him that there had been talks regarding reconstruction. Rest of the morning was taken up with DU QC quoting legal case law. Not once did he mention the current unusual circumstances which is COVID or the failure of the SPFL to provide its members with full details. I think the plan is to stop us being able to even address the judge with our arguments against the SPFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NANOJAMBO Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 8 minutes ago, 5-1Jambo said: SPFL had to be asked at the beginning of proceedings if they supported the DU request for arbitration because they had not filed a request on their submission. Tells you right away how arbitration would go. Judge suggested that there may not be time for arbritation. Lunch now and judge saying this is taking longer than first thought. This is likely to go on all week. DU playing for time in the knowledge that the court doesn't have time. Judge has just said after today he is only available tomorrow afternoon and Friday. The judge asked QC for SPFL, if SPFL had already applied to SFA for arbitration or was this this to be treated as a/the request. The QC didn't know !! Clearly QC for DUFC etc is making that case. Personally (I'm not a lawyer) I find it odd the 3 clubs are engaging a QC to make the case the SPFL should have been doing (the case for arbitration). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Well this has been an entirely underwhelming event so far... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 1 minute ago, Riccarton3 said: This is curious. Like the judge has been on the moon. Christ, this is not some wee case, . How did he think it would pan out? Surprised at the complexity? Wait til! He heard the petitioners. What is his preparation? Would it not make sense to restrict the presentations to an allotted time? Get a sense of how the participants are likely to operate? I could have said the Dundee United /Raith /Cove case in 20 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whatsthefuture Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 I would think boreland also has to keep in mind should this carry in Hearts/PT favour He will possibly be back in court against SFA - SPFL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, busby1985 said: Why didn’t we speak first? It’s our case? The motions before the court today were that the case go to arbitration (DU/Raith/Cove) and the the case be sisted (SPFL), hence it is those parties who will speak first. Hearts/PT substantive claim is not up for discussion today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBJambo Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 3 minutes ago, wavydavy said: I saw a report in the Daily Record the other day where the article clearly stated that due to the fact that less games would be played in the Championship it would be unfair to promote a club and therefore there would be no relegation either. This was/is to be part of the SPFL discussion today. The strange things was that when I copied and pasted the article the part about the number of games etc had miraculouslt fanished. One other poster on here backed me up as he had read the very same thing. It seems that they were either not meant to have published that part or were hastily asked to remove it by someone. All very strange. 3 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said: How the **** can they argue that it is unfair to promote or relegate due to smaller number of games yet they’ve done precisely that?! What’s the point in even playing or fans paying to watch this coming season if they do that? Exactly would just be glorified friendlies. Might as well not play at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch41 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 4 minutes ago, wavydavy said: £1 per minute. Honestly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavydavy Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 11 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said: Dundee United boy took too long basically. Wants the others to say how long they will need. Surely they should all be given enought time to fully present their cases properly. Did he ask the first QC how long he needed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NANOJAMBO Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Riccarton3 said: This is curious. Like the judge has been on the moon. Christ, this is not some wee case, . How did he think it would pan out? Surprised at the complexity? Wait til! He heard the petitioners. What is his preparation? Would it not make sense to restrict the presentations to an allotted time? Get a sense of how the participants are likely to operate? Nope. He was quick to jump on DUFC QC blaming HMFC for the potential lack of time to get this done (Hearts delayed for 2 months)- the judge jumped in and reminded him there had been talk of recon. The judge is switched on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5-1Jambo Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 3 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said: The judge asked QC for SPFL, if SPFL had already applied to SFA for arbitration or was this this to be treated as a/the request. The QC didn't know !! Clearly QC for DUFC etc is making that case. Personally (I'm not a lawyer) I find it odd the 3 clubs are engaging a QC to make the case the SPFL should have been doing (the case for arbitration). Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruyff Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Just now, Footballfirst said: The motions before the court today were that the case go to arbitration (DU/Raith/Cove) and the the case be sisted (SPFL), hence it is those parties who will speak first. Hearts/PT substantive claim is not up for discussion today. Thanks for clarifying. I thought this was just going to be a quick chat with the judge, everyone puts their tuppence in and the judge makes the call within the two hour slot. Never thought it would be a three day snooze fest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allowayjambo1874 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Dundee United QC discusses promotion and relegation then asks the court to 'use common sense'. Fall of chair moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busby1985 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said: The motions before the court today were that the case go to arbitration (DU/Raith/Cove) and the the case be sisted (SPFL), hence it is those parties who will speak first. Hearts/PT substantive claim is not up for discussion today. Oh right. So after lunch we may hear Hearts reasons for court rather than arbitration only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hector Riva Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, Last Laff said: You mean they’ve been given a stolen watch and complaining they shouldn’t give it back as it was almost theres anyway. Was it a Timex watch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMBO.LOU Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, Footballfirst said: No. The next to speak will be the SPFL's QC Gerry Moynihan, before Hearts/PT get the chance to put forward their own arguments and rebut or refute what has been said earlier. The QC for Dundee Utd/Raith/Cove has done exactly the same thing by seeking to dismantle Hearts/PTs arguments. You need to listen to both sides of the argument before making any judgements. I thought the judge said at the start that he had chosen the order in which he would hear things. I was sure he said it would be the DUFC/RR/CR QC first. Then us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixHearts Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, wavydavy said: £1 per minute. I don't think so. Apparently calls to 020 numbers are considered basic rate. Costs vary between mobile networks but I'm on o2, apparently it falls under my free minutes on my contract. Needless to say they're probably all used up now. Edited July 1, 2020 by PhoenixHearts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NANOJAMBO Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Just now, wavydavy said: Surely they should all be given enought time to fully present their cases properly. Did he ask the first QC how long he needed? No. I have to say the case for going to arbitration - which is all the DUFC QC seems to be asking for - is VERY strong. Hearts will have a job countering this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch41 Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 6 minutes ago, Footballfirst said: No. The next to speak will be the SPFL's QC Gerry Moynihan, before Hearts/PT get the chance to put forward their own arguments and rebut or refute what has been said earlier. The QC for Dundee Utd/Raith/Cove has done exactly the same thing by seeking to dismantle Hearts/PTs arguments. You need to listen to both sides of the argument before making any judgements. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hibsarepants Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said: The motions before the court today were that the case go to arbitration (DU/Raith/Cove) and the the case be sisted (SPFL), hence it is those parties who will speak first. Hearts/PT substantive claim is not up for discussion today. Agreed but Hearts QC will be allowed to offer argument / case law etc against Arbitration and Sisting - why the CoS is the correct venue for this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Beni of Gorgie Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 Not everyone inc judge read Kickback every day. Worth remembering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trained One Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 DUtd, Raith and Cove. Did we ever find out if any other clubs have joined them as respondents? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.