Naughty JS

August 1, 2015

Why? Why Indeed?

Why have the normally very secretive PR machine from JS suddenly decided to share their thoughts?

break_the_silence[1]

Why not issue their usual bland and corporate “nothing to say at present” style of non-comment?

Supporters can use their intuition, instincts and intelligence to spot what is happening here.

breaking_silence_2

In the context of the naughty JS activity the BRFC have issued the following statement:-

“Mrs. Justice Proudman’s willingness to allow us permission to appeal her judgment against the club further demonstrates the complexity of this case and the fact that the initial decision in favour of Sainsbury’s last month was far from clear-cut.

The club considers that the judge’s decision further vindicates its decision to take action to compel Sainsbury’s to complete purchase of the Memorial Stadium site.

The case remains very much in the balance and the judge felt it should be considered further by the Court of Appeal.

It is clear from the judgment most of the arguments relied upon by Sainsbury’s to justify their refusal to complete were incorrect, and were not accepted by the judge.

Our case relied upon at least five points, of which we succeeded with all bar one. The remaining point will form the vanguard of the appeal.

The club and our legal team therefore feel confident we can overturn the judgment in the Court of Appeal.

In its statement yesterday, Sainsbury’s claimed the judge said the club should have accepted the £1.5 million it offered to settle the case.

That statement is INCORRECT.

While it is true Sainsbury’s made a cash offer to extricate itself from the litigation, the offer was derisory in the context of the value of the claim.

It was not acceptable to the club as it did not come close to compensating us for the losses and costs incurred as a result of Sainsbury’s refusal to honour the contract, or the lost time in relation to developing the UWE Stadium.

Whilst the decision to order the club to make an interim payment of £375,000 in respect of costs is disappointing, this order will be reversed should the club succeed at the Court of Appeal.

The figure represents a significant discount on what Sainsbury’s could have expected in the usual course of events, and further indicates the judge’s difficulties with their claim.

In fact the figure is less than half the total costs Sainsbury’s were claiming.

The board of directors remains focused on delivering the UWE Stadium and securing the long-term future of the club.”

Share This Post On