Jambos Legal Challenge

[Sammy7nil]

All gone very quiet since arbitration I asked this before but did not get answer, when the case is over and the result is known will the details of the findings and the reason for the decision be made public?

[Col2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

All gone very quiet since arbitration I asked this before but did not get answer, when the case is over and the result is known will the details of the findings and the reason for the decision be made public?

There must be a written outcome, how long that takes to come out if anyone’s guess. However I would the key headline decision must be recorded and confirmed very quickly to avoid parties interpreting it incorrectly.

I reckon this will be done and dusted by the end of the week. IF Hearts and Patrick are offered compensation then the panel (practically) will need say an extra day to make that specific monetary jusdgement and base it on genuine set of figures.

[Sammy7nil]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There must be a written outcome, how long that takes to come out if anyone’s guess. However I would the key headline decision must be recorded and confirmed very quickly to avoid parties interpreting it incorrectly.

I reckon this will be done and dusted by the end of the week. IF Hearts and Patrick are offered compensation then the panel (practically) will need say an extra day to make that specific monetary jusdgement and base it on genuine set of figures.

I suppose they could say compensation to be awarded and agreed in the coming weeks. That would enable the league to start and make a realistic calculation of the sum.

[Onion]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I suppose they could say compensation to be awarded and agreed in the coming weeks. That would enable the league to start and make a realistic calculation of the sum.

So odds were Hearts were for the drop but now they may gain financially from the Covid end to the season ? In what way is that fair to the other Prem clubs ?

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So odds were Hearts we’re for the drop but now they may gain financially from the Covid end to the season ? In what way is that fair to the other Prem clubs ?

Exactly. About once every 10 yrs a team escapes from the position they were in.

[bingo70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Exactly. About once every 10 yrs a team escapes from the position they were in.

Is that something the judges are likely to take into account or is it all fact based stuff they will look at?

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is that something the judges are likely to take into account or is it all fact based stuff they will look at?

I don't know the official answer but it would be basic common sense to first establish any genuine loss due to relegation (as opposed to covid 19) and then to discount that genuine loss to reflect Hearts' own responsibility for being bottom of the table. After all, it was the bottom club that was relegated and not specifically Hearts.

As Andy74 says, only once in the last ten years has the club that was bottom after 30 games stayed up, and even then St Mirren were only one point behind, not four. On that basis I'd apply a 90% discount.

[04Sauzee]

kingantti1874 kingantti1874

Posted 1 hour ago
Hearing we may have some questions to answer for something entirely unrelated to the case , I won’t say any more as could be pish and don’t want to start gossip.. especially on here as journalists all over it. Anyone heard anything ? Will only discuss by PM if you already have an idea so don’t ask as I won’t be spreading gossip.



ps - it’s not a massive problem so don’t worry

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is that something the judges are likely to take into account or is it all fact based stuff they will look at?

No but in the very unlikely event that compensation becomes a factor then it would become quite relevant. They were obviously fairly far down the road of getting relegated by their own making.

[Caversham Green]

Wouldn't it be funny if The SPFL used the 'Karma' thread from Kickedoot to illustrate that supporters fully expected the bottom team in the league to be relegated?

[Future17]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is that something the judges are likely to take into account or is it all fact based stuff they will look at?

A court would take it into account when assessing loss (if that became necessary). Not sure about arbitration.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Wouldn't it be funny if The SPFL used the 'Karma' thread from Kickedoot to illustrate that supporters fully expected the bottom team in the league to be relegated?

That would be a good example of karma.

[Greenworld]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There must be a written outcome, how long that takes to come out if anyone’s guess. However I would the key headline decision must be recorded and confirmed very quickly to avoid parties interpreting it incorrectly.

I reckon this will be done and dusted by the end of the week. IF Hearts and Patrick are offered compensation then the panel (practically) will need say an extra day to make that specific monetary jusdgement and base it on genuine set of figures.

Im not sure that the findings will come out Col2. I think ongoing confidentiality is possible in Scotland through the Arbitration process .
Sure i read it sometime that it was written in to the scots version ...i could be wrong lol

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

[JohnMcM]

I don't know how to place the information here but if you want to confirm what is said about confidentiality.

Google - Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010. Download the PDFs version. Go to page 22 rule 26 will fill you in.

[Greenworld]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know how to place the information here but if you want to confirm what is said about confidentiality.

Google - Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010. Download the PDFs version. Go to page 22 rule 26 will fill you in.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/1/schedule/1

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

[greenginger]

None of that will affect Budge and her statements team.

She won’t have read the rule.

[RyeSloan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know how to place the information here but if you want to confirm what is said about confidentiality.

Google - Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010. Download the PDFs version. Go to page 22 rule 26 will fill you in.

Is that not just covering the disclosure of confidential information used during the process?

It seems to me that the ‘award’ is the key section here and that is delivered to the relevant parties. As the SPFL will need to disclose that (or at least the salient points) to all clubs then it’s highly unlikely that the key outcomes and judgements won’t become public knowledge.

[Sammy7nil]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/1/schedule/1

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know how to place the information here but if you want to confirm what is said about confidentiality.

Google - Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010. Download the PDFs version. Go to page 22 rule 26 will fill you in.

Rule 47 is of interest Award

[hibbyfraelibby]

Reading the 2010 Arbitration Act I believe one of the decisions open to the panel where there is no other practical way to resolve a dispute is that one party is ordered to buy out the sharehold value of the other party to enforce a clean break.

How I would laugh if the panel ordered the SPFL to buy out the Hurtz shareholding in the company. The £0.025p it would cost each club could be financially ruinous😁

[JohnMcM]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is that not just covering the disclosure of confidential information used during the process?

It seems to me that the ‘award’ is the key section here and that is delivered to the relevant parties. As the SPFL will need to disclose that (or at least the salient points) to all clubs then it’s highly unlikely that the key outcomes and judgements won’t become public knowledge.

It reads to me that it also covers disclosure of the findings of the panel, awards etc UNLESS some very strict criterion are met.

[Sammy7nil]

Over on way back they are still discussing what they will do with the £8 million "it had been calculated by independent auditors and is the least they should expect"

I assume the "auditors" took account of Covid and this was not just a figure pulled out the air by The Budgie and Leslie during a late night sherry fuelled zoom call

[JohnMcM]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/1/schedule/1

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

Thanks Greenworld.

[Since452]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Over on way back they are still discussing what they will do with the £8 million "it had been calculated by independent auditors and is the least they should expect"

I assume the "auditors" took account of Covid and this was not just a figure pulled out the air by The Budgie and Leslie during a late night sherry fuelled zoom call

They can't be trusted with money. Never been able to invest it wisely. In the completely hypothetical and pure fantasy scenario they were awarded 8 million they'd only go and blow most of it on a new 8 year contract for chocolate knees Naismith and spend the rest on Tam Cowans scran after hosting his next hospitality gig

[Keith_M]

Let's be clear on this: Only Hearts think this is an either/or situation, where the panel will choose between 1) Premiership Reinstatement and 2) £8M Compensation.


There are countless other possible outcomes.. including: The vote to end the season was legitimate, ergo the relegation is not overturned and no compensation is required.


IMHO, the most likely alternative to that would be that the SPFL are told to re-run the vote. I can't see a second vote going in Hearts favour.

[Aldo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Let's be clear on this: Only Hearts think this is an either/or situation, where the panel will choose between 1) Premiership Reinstatement and 2) £8M Compensation.


There are countless other possible outcomes.. including: The vote to end the season was legitimate, ergo the relegation is not overturned and no compensation is required.


IMHO, the most likely alternative to that would be that the SPFL are told to re-run the vote. I can't see a second vote going in Hearts favour.

Your first paragraph sums them up tbh. Their way or no way regardless of the rules!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Over on way back they are still discussing what they will do with the £8 million "it had been calculated by independent auditors and is the least they should expect"

I assume the "auditors" took account of Covid and this was not just a figure pulled out the air by The Budgie and Leslie during a late night sherry fuelled zoom call

Top Waffle Merchants.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Let's be clear on this: Only Hearts think this is an either/or situation, where the panel will choose between 1) Premiership Reinstatement and 2) £8M Compensation.


There are countless other possible outcomes.. including: The vote to end the season was legitimate, ergo the relegation is not overturned and no compensation is required.


IMHO, the most likely alternative to that would be that the SPFL are told to re-run the vote. I can't see a second vote going in Hearts favour.

Hearts didn’t ask for the rerun of the vote option though.

[nonshinyfinish]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Hearts didn’t ask for the rerun of the vote option though.

Are the arbiters limited to what the various parties have asked for, or can they come up with their own solution?

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are the arbiters limited to what the various parties have asked for, or can they come up with their own solution?

They are not there to look for a solution I think. They are to rule on whether the rules were broken or not. If they were then they would decide on a remedy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nonshinyfinish]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They are not there to look for a solution I think. They are to rule on whether the rules were broken or not. If they were then they would decide on a remedy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Solution is maybe the wrong word, but what I mean is: are the only possible outcomes some variation on what the involved parties have asked for?