|
|
Post by belmontman on Feb 10, 2015 15:22:32 GMT
PUBLISHED
12:30 10th February 2015
Bristol Rovers is today one step closer to a prompt outcome in its dispute with Sainsbury’s over the sale of the Memorial Stadium, Bristol. The sale will fund the development of a new stadium at land next to the University of the West of England.
The Club issued a claim against Sainsbury’s in December seeking court orders clearing the way for the sale of the stadium. This followed the Club’s successful planning application removing the final planning hurdles to the development of the stadium site by Sainsbury’s.
Sainsbury’s is nevertheless refusing to complete the purchase, instead claiming that it is not bound by the planning permission and that this was not obtained in time under the terms of its contract with the Club.
The Club sought an order from the court that the claims should be heard as soon as possible, given the importance of the new stadium scheme to the Club, UWE and to North Bristol. At a hearing in the High Court yesterday, Mr Justice Roth agreed with the club’s argument and found that the case was sufficiently urgent that it should be the subject of an accelerated trial. The Judge therefore ordered that the claims should be heard no later than 14 May 2015.
The Club remains confident that its claim against Sainsbury’s will succeed and therefore anticipates that its stadium development and relocation plan should be back on track by July 2015.
No further comment will be made by the club at this time.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 15:36:06 GMT
Catch up mate.  |
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,165 
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Feb 10, 2015 15:40:26 GMT
It's just the club catching up with the rest of us balders ..  |
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Feb 10, 2015 16:10:44 GMT
There IS new news here.
1. The club claim that the Judge has agreed with their argument. (Not sure what the argument is though, that the case should be heard urgently or that there is a case to hear at all?)
2. That we are bullish of success.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 16:22:40 GMT
I have every faith in nicks case.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Feb 10, 2015 16:23:33 GMT
There IS new news here. 1. The club claim that the Judge has agreed with their argument. (Not sure what the argument is though, that the case should be heard urgently or that there is a case to hear at all?) 2. That we are bullish of success. my interpretation was their is a case to hear and that it should be resolved A.S.A.P
as for your point 2, I think it is using a few more words to say what Rovers have said all along 'Watertight' which really means little
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 16:30:34 GMT
There IS new news here. 1. The club claim that the Judge has agreed with their argument. (Not sure what the argument is though, that the case should be heard urgently or that there is a case to hear at all?) 2. That we are bullish of success. my interpretation was their is a case to hear and that it should be resolved A.S.A.P
as for your point 2, I think it is using a few more words to say what Rovers have said all along 'Watertight' which really means little
Rubber johnnies are watertight and that means something! so let's hope nicks rubber johnnie is water tight as well other wise we'll all be in for a wet face. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 16:36:57 GMT
It's a better statement than we usually get from the club, so far as it goes, so credit for that.
It's not new news, though.
1. This was reported from the High Court yesterday, including the punchline, which isn't mentioned here: the Judge agreed this needs to be heard urgently because UWE is on the point of pulling out, in which case it woild all become moot; the club hopes that they can be kept onside until June at the latest (at which point there are problems with the contract at that end that it might' then be worth addressing, but that's beside the point). Therefore the Judge agreed to fast track it. Why skip that bit? So much more credibility to be gained from at least recapping what is already in the public domain, and give some positive spin to that, even if only to acknowledge and park it.
2. They always have been bullish.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Feb 10, 2015 16:53:55 GMT
my interpretation was their is a case to hear and that it should be resolved A.S.A.P
as for your point 2, I think it is using a few more words to say what Rovers have said all along 'Watertight' which really means little
Rubber johnnies are watertight and that means something! so let's hope nicks rubber johnnie is water tight as well other wise we'll all be in for a wet face. yeah but rubber johnnies are not so watertight after the expiry date. Let's hope Nick's are in date |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 16:55:50 GMT
Rubber johnnies are watertight and that means something! so let's hope nicks rubber johnnie is water tight as well other wise we'll all be in for a wet face. yeah but rubber johnnies are not so watertight after the expiry date. Let's hope Nick's are in date I realised that after trying to patch the holes with bubble gum. trust me it doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by lostinspace on Feb 10, 2015 17:33:13 GMT
would be hard to swallow if it did fail
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Feb 10, 2015 18:00:51 GMT
This is a good statement from the club; it clarifies the current situation pretty well.
This is what is all boils down to.
Of course you might like to know is the extent to which the club is working on alternatives and what short-term implications would be of the decision going against us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gas Since 1957 on Feb 10, 2015 18:07:21 GMT
This is a good statement from the club; it clarifies the current situation pretty well. This is what is all boils down to. Of course you might like to know is the extent to which the club is working on alternatives and what short-term implications would be of the decision going against us. Assuming they do have a Plan B, best to keep that very quiet as that would imply the club think they might lose the court case. Plan B is I win Euro Millions next time it's over £100m. Sure I could spare £40m of that amount! Long as it guaranteed me a decent seat for when we are in the premier League and Champions League......  |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 19:16:15 GMT
This is a good statement from the club; it clarifies the current situation pretty well. This is what is all boils down to. Of course you might like to know is the extent to which the club is working on alternatives and what short-term implications would be of the decision going against us. Do you mind? We're talking filth here! |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Feb 10, 2015 22:52:48 GMT
This is a good statement from the club; it clarifies the current situation pretty well. This is what is all boils down to. Of course you might like to know is the extent to which the club is working on alternatives and what short-term implications would be of the decision going against us. Do you mind? We're talking filth here! Many Apologies  Please continue. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2015 6:32:01 GMT
It's a better statement than we usually get from the club, so far as it goes, so credit for that. It's not new news, though. 1. This was reported from the High Court yesterday, including the punchline, which isn't mentioned here: the Judge agreed this needs to be heard urgently because UWE is on the point of pulling out, in which case it woild all become moot; the club hopes that they can be kept onside until June at the latest (at which point there are problems with the contract at that end that it might' then be worth addressing, but that's beside the point). Therefore the Judge agreed to fast track it. Why skip that bit? So much more credibility to be gained from at least recapping what is already in the public domain, and give some positive spin to that, even if only to acknowledge and park it. 2. They always have been bullish. Could be another court case then Seth as the club have a "watertight" contract with the UWE  |
|
lockleazer
Tarki Micalleff
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 411
|
Post by lockleazer on Feb 11, 2015 7:53:19 GMT
It's a better statement than we usually get from the club, so far as it goes, so credit for that. It's not new news, though. 1. This was reported from the High Court yesterday, including the punchline, which isn't mentioned here: the Judge agreed this needs to be heard urgently because UWE is on the point of pulling out, in which case it woild all become moot; the club hopes that they can be kept onside until June at the latest (at which point there are problems with the contract at that end that it might' then be worth addressing, but that's beside the point). Therefore the Judge agreed to fast track it. Why skip that bit? So much more credibility to be gained from at least recapping what is already in the public domain, and give some positive spin to that, even if only to acknowledge and park it. 2. They always have been bullish. Could be another court case then Seth as the club have a "watertight" contract with the UWE Unless we have another site lined up? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2015 7:55:49 GMT
Could be another court case then Seth as the club have a "watertight" contract with the UWE Unless we have another site lined up? Is Aston Vale now available...  |
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Feb 11, 2015 16:07:48 GMT
If only my garden was bigger
|
|
