Liverpool FC

[Jon MW]

Exactly Josedinho. It's temporary and another way of getting a day or two to stop the sale. A Texas judge will also throw this out I believe but it'll take a day or two by which time Hicks can potentially refinance.

I guess potential new owners being American has something to do with it.

Isn't it something like Americans think American courts have jurisdiction over anything involving any of their citizens?
Didn't one of the state governors get one of his courts to pass legislation giving him control over gambling url's on this basis?



EDIT:
There we go, it is basically time-wasting as diplomacy means they can't just ignore it

BBC Business Editor Robert Peston reported: "Although the Texas court has no direct jurisdiction in the UK, both New England Sports Ventures and Liverpool's bankers, Royal Bank of Scotland, would not wish to be seen to be wilfully defying that court, because that could cause harm to their substantial US operations.

[kinboshi]

Apparently the TRO means the club can't be put into administration.  Also, NESV are willing to wait, and Hicks' delaying tactics will come to nowt.

Even the judge in Texas has said that he doesn't think they have any jurisdiction, and that none of the evidence that Hicks has spoken about is included in anything he's been given.

To quote someone on twitter (again):

@Rushy84: hicks is like a divvy in the local snooker hall who needs about 28 snookers to win but just wont give up.

[Josedinho]

More complications as reports Mill Financial have bought Hicks and Gilletts shares

[TightEnd]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2010/10/liverpool_it_could_be_all_over.html

[boldie]

Some people are funny.  Via twitter:

"Just saw tv footage of Miners and Scousers celebrating. Is Thatcher dead?"

No but it is her Birthday today..must be killing her watching Scousers and miners celebrating....ah, the irony.

[boldie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2010/10/liverpool_it_could_be_all_over.html

Interesting point one of the guys made.

Mills has not passed the fit and proper test yet and what about the written commitment that only RBS and Broughton could approve the sale of the club?


This is very messy indeed and the legal wranglings could well last for a long time on this one....in the mean time Liverpool would surely lose points?

[TightEnd]

Mill=Dwight Schar=part owner of Washington Redskins

[Josedinho]

RBS would not be involved if Mill repay the debt. Don't think Liverpool could lose points as nobody would put them into Administration. NESV might go to court to try and take control of the club but looks like Hicks and Gillett have gone and stuck one finger up to Liverpool on the way out.

[kinboshi]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2010/10/liverpool_it_could_be_all_over.html

Interesting point one of the guys made.

Mills has not passed the fit and proper test yet and what about the written commitment that only RBS and Broughton could approve the sale of the club?


This is very messy indeed and the legal wranglings could well last for a long time on this one....in the mean time Liverpool would surely lose points?

This isn't good.

As for the 'fit and proper' test, don't Mills already own some of G&H's shares?  So surely they will have already had to have gone through the appropriate tests?  Or not?

Sigh - Hicks is an arse.  Anyone know of any mines that are currently unoccupied where he could be thrown?

[kinboshi]

Just thinking, how can Mills buy Hicks and Gillett's shares without the approval of the board? Surely that's the whole point of going to the High Court in the first place and why Broughton was brought in.

This is all so bloody confusing

[Josedinho]

Just thinking, how can Mills buy Hicks and Gillett's shares without the approval of the board? Surely that's the whole point of going to the High Court in the first place and why Broughton was brought in.

This is all so bloody confusing

I believe they borrowed from Mill. If  they weren't repaid part of the deal was they would take shares as payment??

[TightEnd]

Just thinking, how can Mills buy Hicks and Gillett's shares without the approval of the board? Surely that's the whole point of going to the High Court in the first place and why Broughton was brought in.

This is all so bloody confusing

I believe they borrowed from Mill. If  they weren't repaid part of the deal was they would take shares as payment??

Hicks borrowed the money off Mill to buy the shares. Hicks then defaulted on the loan, terms were that shares passed to Mill

Mill then went to Gillette and bought shares of him. Doesn't require board approval from this, just for club to process the paperwork of share transfer

[kinboshi]

Just thinking, how can Mills buy Hicks and Gillett's shares without the approval of the board? Surely that's the whole point of going to the High Court in the first place and why Broughton was brought in.

This is all so bloody confusing

I believe they borrowed from Mill. If  they weren't repaid part of the deal was they would take shares as payment??

Hicks borrowed the money off Mill to buy the shares. Hicks then defaulted on the loan, terms were that shares passed to Mill

Mill then went to Gillette and bought shares of him. Doesn't require board approval from this, just for club to process the paperwork of share transfer

So, what was the court case all about then if Hicks can go and sell his shares and the club (effectively) without the board's authority?

[kinboshi]

Hang on... Mill Financial haven't got Hicks' shares, and he can't sell without board approval.  It was Gillet who defaulted on his loan, wasn't it?

Is that not the case?

[kinboshi]

Also the Texas ruling does not refer to Mills Finance but instead clearly names Hicks and Gillett as the owners.

Curiouser and curiouser.