WINNERS! Liverpool FC go to the High Court

Okay maybe not quite Ironside.  But the legal state at the moment is this.  Hicks and Gillett have threatened legal action to remove Purslow and Ayre and effectively block the sale.  Broughton believes he has written constitution proof that only he can change the members of the board.  

As such it is Liverpool who are going to court to try and obtain a 'Declaratory Judgement'.

According to Wiki this is

A declaratory judgment is typically requested when a party is threatened with a lawsuit but the lawsuit has not yet been filed; or when it is thought by one of two (or more) parties that their rights under law and/or contract might conflict; or as part of a counterclaim to prevent further, similar lawsuits from the same plaintiff (for example, when only a contract claim is filed, but a copyright claim might also be applicable).

According to Martin Broughton this should take just over a week.

So it is essentially drawing first blood.  It will be interesting to see what action Hicks and Gillett now take.  Although with the clock ticking on the loan, they would be pretty foolish not to realise their time is up.

JD,

What if say kenny huang or some arab investment match the valuation of nesv or offer then does that give the numb nuts grounds for removal of the board and take the 'better' value being offered?

I'd imagine the deal has been agreed with these bunch.  Pretty clear it was an auction so in the end NESV must have offered more.

The significance of today (the 6th) can finally be revealed.

The Premier League required 10 days notice of a change of ownership.  Liverpool were simply ensuring they got in before RBS called in the loan in 10 days time.

As it is, the Premier League believe they can approve it within 2 days.

What 'if' they secure a legal challenge to the sale? they can then say sell for 400 million right?

Liverpool are being advised by Slaughter and May.

We will beat Hicks. That is a given. Believe.

Liverpool are being advised by Slaughter and May.

We will beat Hicks. That is a given. Believe.

Are they the insanely good law firm we thought Hicks may have contacted? But its us? I'm mind-fu**ed.

RBS effectively own the club any how, as most of the debt is money they loaned to the yanks.  it's a bit like our houses.  it says on the deed that we own the house, but the bank we lent the money from, can take the house off us if we can't pay back what we owe them when we agreed too.

RBS want their money back, and H & G can't pay!  Therefore, they lose their house!

Liverpool are being advised by Slaughter and May.

We will beat Hicks. That is a given. Believe.

Theres nothing to beat mate. They told Broughton when they appointed him he was in power he controlled sackings etc, they actually gave a written undertaking that he was the only one who could change the board. It was written into the articles of the 2 holding companies These were given to RBS.

H&G are fooked not a leg to stand on. get out thanks for nothing , goodbye and die soon

The only legal Jargon I'm concerned with at the moment is.

If Hicks & Gillet manage to raise the money to pay off the RBS debt, without securing it against the club, ground, melwood, players etc etc, then litterally they can pay off RBS disband the board and remain in control.

This possibility at the moment should not be overlooked as it leaves Martin Broughton, Ian Ayres and Christian Purslow with no power to stop it what so ever.

I'm going to be biting my nails up until teh deal is concluded.

The only legal Jargon I'm concerned with at the moment is.

If Hicks & Gillet manage to raise the money to pay off the RBS debt, without securing it against the club, ground, melwood, players etc etc, then litterally they can pay off RBS disband the board and remain in control.

This possibility at the moment should not be overlooked as it leaves Martin Broughton, Ian Ayres and Christian Purslow with no power to stop it what so ever.

They wont get the money they would have had it by now if they could acquire it. Tramps are done

But the fact is Boston Red Sox are big news in America, our campaign, the video and their lack of credibility leads me to think that most people both sides of the Atlantic would realise that to give them money, secured against their own businesses etc, would be madness and lead to a shitstorm for them.

Hicks and Gillett are being advised by these folks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weil,_Gotshal_&_Manges

They wont get the money they would have had it by now if they could acquire it. Tramps are done

The only bad thing is that if they delay and cause RBS to take over there is a 'remote' chance we could get a 9pt penalty and a £40M charge.

Wouldn't put it past the cu*ts to do that out of spite.

The only bad thing is that if they delay and cause RBS to take over there is a 'remote' chance we could get a 9pt penalty and a £40M charge.

Wouldn't put it past the cu*ts to do that out of spite.

I'm not so sure RBS will do that, they know the money is at the table.

Hicks and Gillett are being advised by these folks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weil,_Gotshal_&_Manges

Being represented by this man apparently

http://www.weil.com/michaelfrancies/

+44 20 7903 1170 tel
+44 20 7903 0990 fax
michael.francies@weil.com

Being represented by this man apparently

http://www.weil.com/michaelfrancies/

+44 20 7903 1170 tel
+44 20 7903 0990 fax
michael.francies@weil.com

Shall we link them the viral video?

It is an interesting point, because although Broughton claims he had a written undertaking that the owners would not interfere with any sale that was considered a reasonable deal for the club it is unclear what would constitute  "a reasonable deal" 

On the one hand you have the clubs interest, which is all we fans care about, and on the other hand you have the owners interest, which we don't give a F**k about. But surely there must be some parameters regarding what defines "a reasonable deal"   

For example, you employ someone to sell your house, that you value at 800,000, and then a few months later the guy sells it for 300,000.  I hope there is not another twist to come in this saga, because I think we will all be happy to see Hicks and Gillette lose money out of this process.
But what if Broughton announced he has sold it for 200 million???    Would it be the same scenario? 

Could he have sold it for 10 quid, if 10 quid was the best offer on the table?

Was there any minimum price agreed?

Frankly, although I think the low price is fantastic, I am shocked, because I never would have believed it would sell that cheap. 

It is an interesting point, because although Broughton claims he had a written undertaking that the owners would not interfere with any sale that was considered a reasonable deal for the club it is unclear what would constitute  "a reasonable deal" 

On the one hand you have the clubs interest, which is all we fans care about, and on the other hand you have the owners interest, which we don't give a f**k about. But surely there must be some parameters regarding what defines "a reasonable deal"   

For example, you employ someone to sell your house, that you value at 800,000, and then a few months later the guy sells it for 300,000.  I hope there is not another twist to come in this saga, because I think we will all be happy to see Hicks and Gillette lose money out of this process.
But what if Broughton announced he has sold it for 200 million???    Would it be the same scenario? 

Could he have sold it for 10 quid, if 10 quid was the best offer on the table?

Was there any minimum price agreed?

Frankly, although I think the low price is fantastic, I am shocked, because I never would have believed it would sell that cheap. 

I'm fairly sure English dicates that something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

I'm fairly sure English dicates that something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

So you are suggesting that if the highest bid was 150 mill then that would have been okay? 

Listening to Broughton the bank employed him ,and the bank had the guarantees put in place .according to broughton there is not a thing they can do, as they have violated the terms of the sale good ridance and fck the pair of them. 

So you are suggesting that if the highest bid was 150 mill then that would have been okay? 

I'm suggesting that if you spent 3 years saying something is worth £600m and nobody takes you up at that offer and then bids that come in are both are the current level, £300m or so, then £600m is a fantasy number which has no relevance.
 

The only bad thing is that if they delay and cause RBS to take over there is a 'remote' chance we could get a 9pt penalty and a £40M charge.

Wouldn't put it past the cu*ts to do that out of spite.

Did the prem league not say we were safe from that because Liverpool football club itself is not broke its the holding companies that are in debt?

The only bad thing is that if they delay and cause RBS to take over there is a 'remote' chance we could get a 9pt penalty and a £40M charge.

Wouldn't put it past the cu*ts to do that out of spite.

I think the PL issued a statement saying that there is no chance of a penalty - even if H&G force RBS to put us in administration - because the club is solvent.