SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[GinRummy]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

If Counsels opinions were as objective as suggested the courts would be a lot less busy.

Considering how many legal disagreements happen between different ompanies and organisations, are the courts really that busy? 

Edited June 14, 2020 by GinRummy

[Jammy T]

5 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

I think that's quite a cynical view to be honest. I am sure that some do behave in that way, but I don't usually have a problem getting an objective view from Counsel about the prospects of success.

It is often the case that Counsel is being instructed to provide a second view on a matter anyway. The solicitors have often already provided an indication on prospects of success and cost exposure. Counsel's opinion is often sought to confirm or disagree. Been involved in that sort of thing many times.

FA is pretty cynical generally to be fair 😂

[Blackshades]

Are the courts actually operating for cases like this just now .just wondering?

[Jammy T]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

If Counsels opinions were as objective as suggested the courts would be a lot less busy.

Blatantly untrue. Most cases of any worth will always have elements of them that are finely balanced - either on legal issues, evidential matters, matters of quantum or more specialist issues involving expert witnesses.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Jammy T

[JamboAl]

13 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

I didn’t bring it up. Someone else did. Do keep up old fellah.

Fair enough old chap and i apologise but you did add your tuppence worth re inflammatory language.

What needed to be reined in?

[Jammy T]

Just now, Blackshades said:

Are the courts actually operating for cases like this just now .just wondering?

You can get an interim interdict hearing in the Court of Session at the moment - at around 2 days notice.

[Jammy T]

6 minutes ago, everton_jambo said:

Presumably we could take steps to liquidate each and every one of them 😁

If we win, ultimately, yes.

[Class of 75]

Apologies been busy today and just catching up with developments. I have also heard what the Ross County Chairman has said about Hearts taking their medicine and accepting relegation and that he has courted legal advice indicating that we would lose an impending court case. This has incensed me as who does he think he is? He is the Chairman of a tin pot club who has less supports than many Junior sides and has only been in the top flight for 5 minutes. How dare he tell the third biggest club in Scotland to accept their fate and be expelled to another division with no guarantee of a proper season of football. Can you imagine if the same situation existed in the EPL with a small club like Bournemouth or Watford telling Liverpool or Man Utd to just roll over and accept their fate? If as seems likely this vote fails tomorrow at 1000 I would like to see the court papers submitted by 1030 and take this lot on. For the sake of sporting integrity and fair play we have to hit this lot hard and watch tin pot chairmen like McGregor sqirm as they see their meagre revenues dwindle. 

[rory78]

Serious question how is Doncaster still in a job??how can the fool claim the SPFL were using the same idea as France then backtrack the other day saying it was different??The whole Dundee fiasco surely puts jail terms a possibility if they lie under oath?? To this day i can't see what Dundee have gained changing vote either??Giving clubs 48hrs to decide the end of the leagues which was a joke in order SO THAT we could ALL start the next campaign in August???can't remember any of these idiot chairmen back then claiming that August wouldn't be possible?????(that's where we've got them by the baws) 

Edited June 14, 2020 by rory78

[The Mercer Takeover]

26 minutes ago, PTBCAL said:

I posted all this charade stuff on Friday morning and I was right.

 

As things stand we are seeking compensation. 

 

However if the league force through reconstruction then fair enough but don’t be waiting on that outcome.

I'm clearly not a legal expert but would you not agree that limiting our claim to compensation only, is almost accepting defeat.

 

If Budge wants to fully unite our fans behind her, she needs to do more than just roll over.

 

Irrelevant of any compensation, seeing the SPFL kick-off in August and us waiting around doing nothing until October, will be more than many of our supporters can take. This is a dangerous route for Budge and Hearts.

 

 

 

 

[Scnorthedinburgh]

9 minutes ago, Jammy T said:

What if the clubs don’t have the money to pay the compo? 
 

You can win a case for money and not get a penny if your opponent is skint. If we go down a leave and lose £8m in the process and win a case and don’t get that money back I’m not sure even James Naderson would bail us out. We’d be as well starting again. Again.

Unfortunately that's how it goes.

Please think back to the last time courts got involved in Scottish football.

It wasn't quick, wasn't pretty (Well a bit)

If you think Hearts v SPFL and 40 odds clubs won't be messy I think your in for a shock.

[JimmyCant]

1 minute ago, JamboAl said:

Fair enough old chap and i apologise but you did add your tuppence worth re inflammatory language.

What needed to be reined in?

Quite clear what I thought and why in my previous posts on the matter. He doesn’t represent Hearts in any way shape or form being one of them. Threatening catastrophic legal action when he is in no position to take that forward or authorise it being another. Much better to leave statements like that to the club or it’s legal team IMO. That way the message is consistent and valid.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

4 minutes ago, Class of 75 said:

Apologies been busy today and just catching up with developments. I have also heard what the Ross County Chairman has said about Hearts taking their medicine and accepting relegation and that he has courted legal advice indicating that we would lose an impending court case. This has incensed me as who does he think he is? He is the Chairman of a tin pot club who has less supports than many Junior sides and has only been in the top flight for 5 minutes. How dare he tell the third biggest club in Scotland to accept their fate and be expelled to another division with no guarantee of a proper season of football. Can you imagine if the same situation existed in the EPL with a small club like Bournemouth or Watford telling Liverpool or Man Utd to just roll over and accept their fate? If as seems likely this vote fails tomorrow at 1000 I would like to see the court papers submitted by 1030 and take this lot on. For the sake of sporting integrity and fair play we have to hit this lot hard and watch tin pot chairmen like McGregor sqirm as they see their meagre revenues dwindle. 

There is no vote tomorrow. 

 

It's an indication of how clubs may vote in 7 days time. 

 

Probably would have been better serving papers prior to clubs telling us how they might vote next week 

Edited June 14, 2020 by Sir Gio

[Scnorthedinburgh]

9 minutes ago, Jammy T said:

What if the clubs don’t have the money to pay the compo? 
 

You can win a case for money and not get a penny if your opponent is skint. If we go down a leave and lose £8m in the process and win a case and don’t get that money back I’m not sure even James Naderson would bail us out. We’d be as well starting again. Again.

Unfortunately that's how it goes.

Please think back to the last time courts got involved in Scottish football.

It wasn't quick, wasn't pretty (Well a bit)

If you think Hearts v SPFL and 40 odds clubs won't be messy I think your in for a shock.

[Biffa Bacon]

11 minutes ago, everton_jambo said:

Presumably we could take steps to liquidate each and every one of them 😁

No, that's not our concern. If we are awarded a settlement the court can enforce payment. Where the money comes from is nothing to do with us, just that it is paid. 

[Fluorescent Adolescent]

28 minutes ago, PTBCAL said:

I posted all this charade stuff on Friday morning and I was right.

 

As things stand we are seeking compensation. 

 

However if the league force through reconstruction then fair enough but don’t be waiting on that outcome.

Well we shall see what outcome lodging papers brings. I don’t believe for one minute this has been done so the SPFL can say in court ‘we tried our best’ but that’s because I don’t believe for one minute the SPFL will defend this in court.

 

Your ‘I was right’ opening gambit ain’t a good look either, btw.
 

I hope there’s no hard feelings, I appreciate you posting what you’ve heard, despite my somewhat aggressive tone. We’re all (?!) Hearts fans and this is a very emotive subject. 

 

Going to be a huge week.
 

👍🏻

 

[Tommy Brown]

Surely we are claiming compensation against SPFL first and foremost.

Yes, the clubs are in turn the SPFL, Hearts included.

The first tranche of Sky money I imagine will not be with the SPFL until the start of the season. (Maybe I'm wrong).

Any compensation would be from that.

 

[RENE]

1 minute ago, The Mercer Takeover said:

I'm clearly not a legal expert but would you not agree that limiting our claim to compensation only, is almost accepting defeat.

 

If Budge wants to fully unite our fans behind her, she needs to do more than just roll over.

 

Irrelevant of any compensation, seeing the SPFL kick-off in August and us waiting around doing nothing until October, will be more than many of our supporters can take. This is a dangerous route for Budge and Hearts.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't  think we'll go for compensation initially.  We want our place in the Premier League and that's  what we'll go for. Budge will not want to destroy teams.  The compensation  will follow if judge doesn't push SPFL to change formats. 

[JimmyCant]

4 minutes ago, The Mercer Takeover said:

I'm clearly not a legal expert but would you not agree that limiting our claim to compensation only, is almost accepting defeat.

 

If Budge wants to fully unite our fans behind her, she needs to do more than just roll over.

 

Irrelevant of any compensation, seeing the SPFL kick-off in August and us waiting around doing nothing until October, will be more than many of our supporters can take. This is a dangerous route for Budge and Hearts.

 

 

 

 

We dont know at this stage what the legal advice is. It’s possible she has been told that going for compensation has a better chance of success And is less risky than going for re-instatement. When she was interviewed by McGlaughlin she emphasised compensation when the legal action was discussed . I agree with PTBCAL and think we’ll go for compensation only, hoping that the OOC settlement is reconstruction with money as the second prize if it goes all the way.

[Jammy T]

9 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

Unfortunately that's how it goes.

Please think back to the last time courts got involved in Scottish football.

It wasn't quick, wasn't pretty (Well a bit)

If you think Hearts v SPFL and 40 odds clubs won't be messy I think your in for a shock.

It will be a right old mess - but who does that suit more? Who isn’t starting football until October?

[true-jambo]

40 minutes ago, PTBCAL said:

I posted all this charade stuff on Friday morning and I was right.

 

As things stand we are seeking compensation. 

 

However if the league force through reconstruction then fair enough but don’t be waiting on that outcome.

Why when the French and Belgian courts ruled that relegating clubs in circumstances the same or similar to ours was illegal, we not go down that route first

[JamboAl]

13 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Quite clear what I thought and why in my previous posts on the matter. He doesn’t represent Hearts in any way shape or form being one of them. Threatening catastrophic legal action when he is in no position to take that forward or authorise it being another. Much better to leave statements like that to the club or it’s legal team IMO. That way the message is consistent and valid.

How do you know in what capacity he was writing?  I'd be very surprised if he's not a shareholder but in any case he wasn't threatening anything.  He was outlining his suggestions of the factors he saw as being relevant.

Edited June 14, 2020 by JamboAl

[JimmyCant]

13 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

Unfortunately that's how it goes.

Please think back to the last time courts got involved in Scottish football.

It wasn't quick, wasn't pretty (Well a bit)

If you think Hearts v SPFL and 40 odds clubs won't be messy I think your in for a shock.

Didn’t seem that messy in France and Belgium. Both done and dusted in around 4 weeks. This will be settled out of court. Just depends what we are prepared to accept to call a halt to it. Wish - Want - Walk as they say.

Edited June 14, 2020 by JimmyCant

[Gulf Jambo]

38 minutes ago, Smithee said:

I think a better question is what judge is going to put hundreds of jobs at risk by stopping the league when compensation is a possibility. 

 

If a judge thinks there is a resonable possibilty that we would be due compensation then it is his obligation to grant the interdict to stop the illegal action against us

[Jammy T]

19 minutes ago, The Mercer Takeover said:

I'm clearly not a legal expert but would you not agree that limiting our claim to compensation only, is almost accepting defeat.

 

If Budge wants to fully unite our fans behind her, she needs to do more than just roll over.

 

Irrelevant of any compensation, seeing the SPFL kick-off in August and us waiting around doing nothing until October, will be more than many of our supporters can take. This is a dangerous route for Budge and Hearts.

 

 

 

 

If PTBCAL is right it may be we have to split our action between two different arbitrary bodies. I don’t know the insides of the rules.

 

Ordinarily you would have a primary case - reinstatement.

 

Then you would have a case “in the alternative” which would be our compensation claim.

 

We would only be due compensation though if it was found there had been an unlawful act.
 

The normal remedy for an unlawful act would be for the result or action of that unlawful act to be reversed. That would be reinstatement. If that was not possible then compensation would be due.

 

This is why I don’t follow what PTCBAL appears to have been told. 
 

There is no claim for compensation unless there is a claim for reinstatement as they are integrally linked.

 

Unless we have, for whatever reason, probably due to the way that football is run and he fact the UEFA and FIFA are intertwined we have to take each of our remedies to a different tribunal.

 

In Belgium for example their case win was not in court - it now has to be ratified in court, but that is the normal outcome for the particular process they undertook.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Jammy T

[Guest ToqueJambo]

41 minutes ago, Smithee said:

I think a better question is what judge is going to put hundreds of jobs at risk by stopping the league when compensation is a possibility. 

 

I think either compensation or reconstruction is a given. If the SPFL had any sense they would have worked out a compensation package in advance. They've just been making it up as they go though wth no thought for any club except Celtic and their title and CL place.

[Scnorthedinburgh]

2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Didn’t seem that messy in France and Belgium. Both done and dusted in around 4 weeks. This will be settled out of court. Just depends what we are prepared to accept to call a halt to it. Wish - Want - Walk as they say.

Pretty certain both governments got involved in the former.

Don't think think it will be out of court, but I do think Hearts will win. God help Scottish football when we are in a shortened championship and win the case.

[Scnorthedinburgh]

9 minutes ago, Jammy T said:

It will be a right old mess - but who does that suit more? Who isn’t starting football until October?

It's Scottish  football we would shoot ourselves before we admired that collectively is the only way for 2 years.

[JimmyCant]

2 minutes ago, Gulf Jambo said:

 

If a judge thinks there is a resonable possibilty that we would be due compensation then it is his obligation to grant the interdict to stop the illegal action against us

No it’s not. It simply isn’t. It’s way more complex than that. The judge MAY well instruct sequestration of funds (the TV money) so it’s there if we win the case but getting an interdict means you are trying to stop something happening, in our case starting the season without us in the top flight. That’s not a given, even Leslie Deans accepts that.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

34 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

They never blinked once over SEVCO re the courts.

 

What have sevco got to do with it? They were completely in the wrong and actually should have been dumped out of the league completely. The SPFL/SFA bent over backwards to keep them in the league and hence in business, totally the opposite of what they're doing to us and other clubs now.

[Kirky Jambo]

16 minutes ago, Biffa Bacon said:

No, that's not our concern. If we are awarded a settlement the court can enforce payment. Where the money comes from is nothing to do with us, just that it is paid. 

So does that mean if the money isn’t there, we can’t enforce it as a debt? 
 

I was looking at it as Hearts suing all 42 clubs, and if they can’t come up with the cash between them, there surely must be some further recourse?

[WorldChampions1902]

There seems to be a view that our legal team could be Brodie’s? So what about the pedigree of Doncaster’s legal experts? 

 

Well as many of you will know, Doncaster is a trained Lawyer and he worked for the legal firm, Burges Salmon. At the end of last year, the SPFL appointed.........wait for it........Burges Salmon to its panel of legal advisers!

 

More comments on this appointment from Doncaster here  https://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/press-releases/burges-salmon-secures-spfl-panel-appointment/

 

So potentially, Doncaster could be joining forces with his former employer to defend his current employer against legal action from one of his current employers members.

 

I’m sure Neil will be relishing the prospect of working closely with some familiar faces. And when the SPFL lose their case, Neil has a ready made scapegoat!

[Beast Boy]

3 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Disgusting self interest being in distress in the first place.

It’s all about saving himself.

 

Now is not the time to help him.

 

Nobody would even consider helping, if it was one of his other colleagues like Ross, Hammy or Mirren who were in distress.

 

Pathetic that he’s sitting there squealing like a pig.

 

He should just accept his medicine.

 

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by Special Officer Doofy

[Scnorthedinburgh]

4 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

I think either compensation or reconstruction is a given. If the SPFL had any sense they would have worked out a compensation package in advance. They've just been making it up as they go though wth no thought for any club except Celtic and their title and CL place.

Nail on the head there. If one of the OF wasn't on a potential record run, we would not be here.

[kila]

How reported has this injustice been elsewhere in the footballing world? Especially now the results are in from the rest of Europe and it is only Scotland doing this.

 

Gary Lineker was what made the SFA cave with the James Keatings red card against Rangers colts where he was going to miss out on the final. This is even more of an injustice than his second yellow for 'diving' but not heard a peep.

 

Some external pressure over this injustice would be nice...

 

[JimmyCant]

7 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

 

Don't think think it will be out of court, but I do think Hearts will win. God help Scottish football when we are in a shortened championship and win the case.

They can’t afford to take the chance we’d win £8 million and they won’t take that chance. It’s a massive MASSIVE gamble on their part if they let this go to a hearing 

Edited June 14, 2020 by JimmyCant

[Don Dan]

I can't get my head round why we are having an indicative vote tomorrow then the real vote on Thursday. Its like Dundee lodging the vote then changing once they saw the green pound. 

Imagine doing that in a local election or a general election. Crazy stuff imo

[Scnorthedinburgh]

5 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

What have sevco got to do with it? They were completely in the wrong and actually should have been dumped out of the league completely. The SPFL/SFA bent over backwards to keep them in the league and hence in business, totally the opposite of what they're doing to us and other clubs now.

And it took how long? It's the only legal close to what is facing us.

SEVCO tried to bully the SPL didn't work, case took ages with HMRC.

Hearts going legal to bully the SPFL won't work going by that.

 

[Big Slim Stylee]

From the moment this farce started, and the nonsense of asking AB to engage in the various reconstruction charades, I've wanted us to sue the *******s. Nothing has altered my opinion.

 

[kila]

5 minutes ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

There seems to be a view that our legal team could be Brodie’s? So what about the pedigree of Doncaster’s legal experts? 

 

Well as many of you will know, Doncaster is a trained Lawyer and he worked for the legal firm, Burges Salmon. At the end of last year, the SPFL appointed.........wait for it........Burges Salmon to its panel of legal advisers!

 

More comments on this appointment from Doncaster here  https://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/press-releases/burges-salmon-secures-spfl-panel-appointment/

 

So potentially, Doncaster could be joining forces with his former employer to defend his current employer against legal action from one of his current employers members.

 

I’m sure Neil will be relishing the prospect of working closely with some familiar faces. And when the SPFL lose their case, Neil has a ready made scapegoat!

 

 

Reading that makes me wonder if this is being manufactured by Doncaster as his efforts have hinted he doesn't mind if it goes to court.

 

But of course Neil is a man of integrity and wouldn't ever consider doing such a thing to line his pockets even more. There are no conflicts of interest here.

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by kila

[Class of 75]

26 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

There is no vote tomorrow. 

 

It's an indication of how clubs may vote in 7 days time. 

 

Probably would have been better serving papers prior to clubs telling us how they might vote next week 

Apologies mate. Like everyone else has said on here, sounds like they are indeed stalling for time. 

[chrisyboy7]

7 minutes ago, everton_jambo said:

So does that mean if the money isn’t there, we can’t enforce it as a debt? 
 

I was looking at it as Hearts suing all 42 clubs, and if they can’t come up with the cash between them, there surely must be some further recourse?

This is unfair on the clubs that will vote for reconstruction 

[luckydug]

25 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Quite clear what I thought and why in my previous posts on the matter. He doesn’t represent Hearts in any way shape or form being one of them. Threatening catastrophic legal action when he is in no position to take that forward or authorise it being another. Much better to leave statements like that to the club or it’s legal team IMO. That way the message is consistent and valid.

Dunno what you are getting your knickers in a twist about. 

LD is a Hearts fan if he wants to fire

e mails off to the press he is perfectly entitled to. 

Dont think he has actually libelled anyone has he ? 

[Scnorthedinburgh]

Just now, Dannie Boy said:

I can't get my head round why we are having an indicative vote tomorrow then the real vote on Thursday. Its like Dundee lodging the vote then changing once they saw the green pound. 

Imagine doing that in a local election or a general election. Crazy stuff imo

Imagine all the club's owners and chairs letting that be within the voting rules?

Scottish football is a complete basket case.

[kingantti1874]

17 minutes ago, true-jambo said:

Why when the French and Belgian courts ruled that relegating clubs in circumstances the same or similar to ours was illegal, we not go down that route first

because we’d lose until the reconstruction option is 100% of the table

[Footballfirst]

Just now, everton_jambo said:

So does that mean if the money isn’t there, we can’t enforce it as a debt? 
 

I was looking at it as Hearts suing all 42 clubs, and if they can’t come up with the cash between them, there surely must be some further recourse?

Hearts won't be suing the clubs. They will be suing the Limited company commonly known as the SPFL.

 

That company generates its income mainly through sponsorship and TV deals.  That would be the source of any financial award granted in Hearts favour.

 

Each club only holds a single share in the SPFL with a nominal value of £1. That is the extent of their individual liability should the SPFL be unable to meet its liabilities. If that was the case, then the SPFL itself would become insolvent and, in all probability, a new football league would be formed to which the clubs would join. The new league would also have to seek recognition by the SFA and UEFA.  

[hughesie27]

1 minute ago, chrisyboy7 said:

This is unfair on the clubs that will vote for reconstruction 

Those clubs should be coming out in the papers and trying to convince other teams to back it then. I don't think a single team has.

[gator]

42 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

I think that's quite a cynical view to be honest. I am sure that some do behave in that way, but I don't usually have a problem getting an objective view from Counsel about the prospects of success.

It is often the case that Counsel is being instructed to provide a second view on a matter anyway. The solicitors have often already provided an indication on prospects of success and cost exposure. Counsel's opinion is often sought to confirm or disagree. Been involved in that sort of thing many times.

So I take it you believe obviously AB will have been well advised on our chances of obtaining a positive result if this is taken before the courts? I don't think I have read or heard her actually say anything other than she has consulted Counsel, things are very fluid in this situation, I believe the case builds in our favour by the day, I still don't think this goes to court!

[kingantti1874]

4 minutes ago, chrisyboy7 said:

This is unfair on the clubs that will vote for reconstruction 

but it’s a democracy ! That’s whats being thrown in our face day after day.. if we could get 25 teams pro reconstruction then the issue can be forced

Edited June 14, 2020 by kingantti1874

[Jammy T]

10 minutes ago, everton_jambo said:

So does that mean if the money isn’t there, we can’t enforce it as a debt? 
 

I was looking at it as Hearts suing all 42 clubs, and if they can’t come up with the cash between them, there surely must be some further recourse?

If they are jointly and severally liable we claim it all from Celtic and Sevco and leave it to them to get their share back from the other teams

 

😂😂