Hicks and Gillette still seeking Damages.

I hereby declare that is has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that you pair are cu*ts.

As if we didnt know this already, The justice system has always been a tad slow !

I hereby declare that is has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that you pair are cu*ts.

Objection me lord! could the right hounrable gentleman not associate the word c**t with Hicks & Gillette as it is offensive to the word c**t, which is such a beautiful place to be in.

Aren't the cu*ts dead yet?

Why the F**k not...

They say the devil looks after his own, in which case the devil is one seriously sh*t businessman.

Objection sustained.
Motion to apologies to all useful cu*ts.
Court will move to find in favour of the useful c**t.
Racerx34 will be held in contempt.



Oh wait...

It's been a bit like a brothel in the courts down in that thar london over the last couple of days, the two murdochs and these two cowboys. cu*ts everywhere, sweaty ones at that.

High Court judge brands Hicks & Gillet 'untrustworthy'.
 
                                  http://bleacherreport.com/tb/bgn42
                                                                                         

High Court judge brands Hicks & Gillet 'untrustworthy'.
 
                                  http://bleacherreport.com/tb/bgn42
                                                                                         

Stuey any Liverpool supporter could of told the learned judge that those 2 pricks were untrustworthy.Hope the judge can fine the basta*ds a massive amount for wasting the courts time,and trying to fleece our club.

Stuey any Liverpool supporter could of told the learned judge that those 2 pricks were untrustworthy.Hope the judge can fine the basta*ds a massive amount for wasting the courts time,and trying to fleece our club.

That's the judges view of their conduct as they try to convince somebody that they were victims Billy.
They know they haven't got a hope in hell of reversing the decision of HM High Court and are on a face saving exercise to salvage some credibility so any future scams stand the remotest chance of coming off.
Pathetic losers is the image that jumps out.

That's the judges view of their conduct as they try to convince somebody that they were victims Billy.
They know they haven't got a hope in hell of reversing the decision of HM High Court and are on a face saving exercise to salvage some credibility so any future scams stand the remotest chance of coming off.
Pathetic losers is the image that jumps out.

Stuey I understand what you were saying I was just being sarcastic to the judges opinion,cheers.

Stuey I understand what you were saying I was just being sarcastic to the judges opinion,cheers.

Billy I'm glad we have the luxury of being able to piss on the fraudsters from a great height.

Billy I'm glad we have the luxury of being able to piss on the fraudsters from a great height.

Loving that comment, made my day has that. Well in mate. Sometimes a poster says what you want to say and saves you the bother of typing it out yourself, this is one of those moments. Unfortunately though, explaining this has resulted in me having to type more than i would have if i'd said what you had in the first place!. 

Lets damage the pair of c*nts then

Tick Tock Tom & Georgey boy says Grimy Reaper.

Not really much further forward but here you go.

Liverpool FC sale court case is being held in private

A COURT hearing which could finally reject former Liverpool FC owner Tom Hicks’ claims the sale of the club was “an epic swindle” is being held in private.

Mr Justice Peter Smith yesterday ruled a three-day legal hearing at the High Court in London will remain behind closed doors.

The application for privacy was sought by the Royal Bank of Scotland which is seeking a judgement it acted with propriety during the sale of the Reds to Fenway Sports Group (FSG).

It also wants a declaration it acted properly while pursuing the £237m loaned to Tom Hicks and his former co-owner George Gillett.

The bank’s pursuit of the debt ultimately led to Hicks and Gillett losing control of the club and paved the way for Boston businessman John Henry and his consortium to purchase Liverpool for £300m. This week’s court case comes after a two-month hiatus during which Clyde and Co, lawyers representing Hicks, have been scrutinising extra documents released by RBS following a disclosure ruling by Mr Justice Smith in March.

It was presumed the break would allow the Americans to finally decide how to proceed with their claim of an ‘epic swindle’, or if they were resigned to dropping their multi-million pound litigation altogether.

RBS, FSG, Reds managing director Ian Ayre, former managing director Christian Purslow and former club chairman Martin Broughton – directors at the time of the sale – all have legal representatives in the High Court.

The ECHO yesterday challenged the decision to hold these proceedings in private.

But Mr Justice Smith indicated the need for confidentiality on behalf of RBS trumped any arguments of open justice or the obvious strong public interest in the case from millions of Liverpool fans at home and abroad.

A summary judgement will be delivered, probably in several weeks time, part of which may be deemed public, but a large portion of which could still remain hidden.

RBS is concerned certain financial disclosures could damage their reputation if discussed in public.

Read More http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news//2012/05/15/liverpool-fc-sale-court-case-is-being-held-in-private-100252-30969907/?campaign=Northwest_email_echonewsemail:20120515#ixzz1uxvG2Xbb

Can RBS reputation really get that much worse? Their reputation has been shredded since the bail out!

Not too fussed about it being held in private though to be honest, their gone, they won't win damages so we can all move on and they can (hopefully) lose everything they have left.

RBS Wins Dismissal Of Mill Financial Claim

Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc won the dismissal of a breach-of-contract claim in a lawsuit brought by a lender over a $70 million personal loan to former Liverpool soccer club owner George Gillett.

Mill Financial sued Gillett in November 2010 in New York state court over the loan, seeking $117 million in principal, fees and legal expenses. The Springfield, Virginia-based lender added Edinburgh-based RBS to the suit last year.

Liverpool’s banks forced a sale of the club to Boston Red Sox owner John W. Henry’s New England Sports Ventures -- now known as Fenway Sports Group -- for 300 million pounds ($471 million) in October 2010 after Gillett and Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks failed to pay back debt.

New York State Supreme Court Justice Eileen Bransten in an order dated yesterday granted a motion by RBS to dismiss the breach of contract claim, while denying a motion to throw out a second claim for breach of implied of covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Mill Financial seeks “purely consequential” damages in the suit based on the theory that it lost its ability to profit from related transactions, a legal remedy that was barred from a contract between Mill Financial, RBS and Wachovia Bank, Bransten wrote.

‘General Damages’

“Plaintiffs have not alleged that they sustained general damages as a result of RBS’ breach of the Tri-Party Agreement, nor have they provided any affidavit in support of this contention,” Bransten said. “Plaintiffs allege only consequential damages that stem from their preclusion from either refinancing the club’s debt to RBS or buying the club outright.”

Bransten gave the plaintiffs 30 days to refile the claim to include damages that aren’t prohibited by the agreement.

Ed Canaday, a spokesman for Royal Bank of Scotland, declined to comment on the ruling in a telephone interview. Tad O’Connor, an attorney with Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP who is representing Mill Financial, declined to comment immediately.

The case is Mill Financial LLC v. Gillett, 10-652055, New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan (New York County).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-26/rbs-wins-dismissal-of-mill-financial-claim.html

Hope to F**k this is the last time we read a thread about these cu*ts in The Kop!

Wow - lots of legal talk in there and  a touch early for me to take it all in...

It appears though as if they are fianlly losing the final battle for damages against anyone regarding LFC. They will of course resubmit any claim, and try again in some back water state to get money out of us. But for now they are losing a lot of money and time trying to win...

Personally I hope to see these two (and in my mind I do) looking like Mortmer & Randall Duke, not in Trading Places but in Coming to America. Broke, on the sidewalk still bitter about their failings...

Personally I hope to see these two (and in my mind I do) looking like Mortmer & Randall Duke, not in Trading Places but in Coming to America. Broke, on the sidewalk still bitter about their failings...

Better hope some African Prince doesn't give them a handout   

Another failed sports venture get's paid out by the cowboy. 

http://espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/story/_/id/8428790/former-texas-rangers-owner-tom-hicks-settles-failed-project

And the fraud case is still going ahead. 

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20120911-judge-won-t-toss-lawsuit-claiming-fraudulent-audit-of-tom-hicks-former-sports-empire.ece

Another failed sports venture get's paid out by the cowboy. 

http://espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/story/_/id/8428790/former-texas-rangers-owner-tom-hicks-settles-failed-project

And the fraud case is still going ahead. 

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20120911-judge-won-t-toss-lawsuit-claiming-fraudulent-audit-of-tom-hicks-former-sports-empire.ece

When is the Law going to put this man away. He has systematically screwed a lot of people out of a lot of money, and yet the lawyers/judges keep him in the luxury that others are paying for.

And yet, if you sell a battery to Iran, you are deported for aiding terrorism. Sorry, but America has one fu**ed up legal system.

There period of ownership is one I am very keen to forget. Great on the pitch, don't get me wrong, but every night I went to sleep, not knowing if we would still have a club in the morning. That was a horrible thought.

Seems like they're going to get their day in court after all.  Should be interesting to hear what really went on and if, as some believe, there were other buyers.

Red row: Former Liverpool FC owners to take RBS to High Court trial over sale of club at "substantial undervalue"
24 Oct 2012 17:53

Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett claim the club was sold at a "substantial undervalue" and RBS "deliberately" blocked their attempts to "refinance"

A High Court judge said two American businessmen who used to own Liverpool Football Club should be allowed to air grievances with bank bosses at a trial.

Mr Justice Peter Smith said it was questionable whether the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) had "truly distanced itself" from the "process" when the club was sold two years ago.

And he said former owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett should be given the chance to have evidence tested in the High Court.

The judge said he hoped that a trial could take place early in 2013.

Mr Justice Peter Smith's decision - announced in a written ruling - is the latest stage in legal action launched after the club was sold in 2010.

In March, RBS bosses asked the judge to declare them not guilty of "any dishonesty or corruption" at a High Court hearing in London.

Lawyers representing RBS said Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett had alleged a "grand conspiracy" but failed to produce "any evidence".

Liverpool was sold to New England Sports Ventures - headed by American businessman John W Henry - in a £300 million deal in October 2010.

Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett tried and failed to block the sale.

"RBS's contention... is that in April 2010... the former owners agreed to a structure of the group which involved them giving up control," Mr Justice Peter Smith said.

"They deny that they owed any obligations as regards giving the former owners opportunities to refinance.

"RBS contends that an examination of the internal documents relied upon by the former owners show that it had no role in the sale that took place."

The judge added: "The former owners' contention is that in reality... RBS controlled everything.

"As part of that exercise, RBS was determined to remove the former owners from the control of Liverpool FC.

"This, the former owners contend, was because RBS believed that would give them kudos in the eyes of the public, whereas its continued involvement with the former owners would operate negatively on its reputation.

"The former owners contend that the opportunities to refinance were frustrated by RBS deliberately to achieve this ulterior purpose."

Mr Justice Peter Smith said he had concluded that it was a matter which ought to go to trial.

"There is in my mind a question as to whether or not RBS truly distanced itself from the sale process," the judge said.

"In reality, what actually happened between April 2010 and October 2010 can only be discerned by a trial when the relevant players give evidence and their evidence is tested by cross-examination in the light of the contemporaneous documents."

He added: "In my view, it would be wrong and a denial of justice potentially at this preliminary stage to deny the former owners an opportunity to have a trial on this issue."

Mr Justice Peter Smith went on: "This matter should be brought to a speedy conclusion.

"I would wish directions to be agreed if possible with a view to this action... being heard early in 2013."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/city-news/tom-hicks-and-george-gillett-former-1397345