 | | |
| timark_uk wrote: Apparently, it's not stopping the sale, it's stopping the buying. I think it has something to do with the people that want to purchase the club being American. Mark | |
| | |
The basic question is down to where the sale is actually taking place and therefore which court has jurisdiction over that. Fundamentally the people who want to sell the club and (obviously) the club itself is in the UK. The two board members who don't want to sell and the holding company which actually owns all the shares of the club as a PLC are in Texas. The people buying the club are in New York. So there is an argument about which court is the most appropriate one for the case to be heard in.
There is another point however that there is a tenant of international law that states that once a case starts in one country, you can't then start a related case in another country until the first one has been resolved. So given the legal bunfight started in the UK, there is an argument to be considered that even if the Texas court is actually the 'best' court, it may be that it has to be heard in the UK because, essentially, that one started first.
In summary : Take any scene from the film Trading Places, and substitute Hicks & Gilette for Randolph & Mortimer Duke. Err.. except maybe that scene where Jamie Lee Curtis takes her top off.
There is also a third legal argument about exactly what rights each board member has, which include some stuff to do with a deal two board members made with RBS when RBS lent Liverpool £200m some while ago, a loan which is due today. If the loan isn't paid off today RBS therefore have the right to foreclose, which means RBS then own the club and neither side can do anything about selling or not selling. The two US board members would actually prefer that (as they are opposed to the current deal on offer), so some of their tactic is actually just to try to stall things until the loan deadline has passed, as a way to stop the sale going through as the other three board members planned.
As it is, according to the latest news the Texas court injunction has been lifted, which effectively means the UK court is in control. That court's opinion as previously stated is that the sale of Liverpool FC to NESV is fair and valid. So it appears the sale will go ahead, NESV will own Liverpool and Hicks & Gilete will collectively be down about $150m. Ouch. There are reports that H&G are about to launch a compensation claim against NESV in the US for $1.6b (one point six billion dollars) , which they claim they have lost equal to the value of Liverpool FC plus future profits. Anyone with any sense of the current value of Liverpool FC will tell you that figure is too large by several orders of magnitude.
Oh, another small point - evidence suggests that H&G had the details for the court case in Texas ready, even before the court case in the UK was heard. And they proceeded with the US action even after the UK judge said they had no rights to do so. This leaves H&G open to action for civil contempt of court in the UK, the maximum punishment for which is two years in gaol.
Jon