boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 This is a right serious-faced wee guy that's rabbiting on now. He looks as though it really matters to him. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 Break for lunch. Back at 2pm. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 btw, that punter Albert Kinloch who is suing Corals over whether Rangers are a new club or not is in the court of session today . Expected to last 3 days.Rangers obsessed beggar James Doleman is covering it. I suspect he couldn't get enough manks to chip in for the train fare to London. He lost his case and his bet - " It said Rangers Football Club Plc sold its one share in the SPL to Sevco Scotland following the sale of assets by administrators, which required the approval of at least eight members of the SPL and the application was refused, making it no longer eligible to play in the top tier. It then applied to join the SFL and was permitted to come into the lowest league. Lord Bannatyne said: “The foregoing process cannot be described as being moved by anyone to a lower division, or being moved down or demoted.” The judge said: “I am satisfied that what did not happen was that the SPL moved or demoted Rangers to a lower division. “Rangers ended up in a lower division by the entry into a contract which allowed them to join the SFL in the third division. “I am persuaded that the reasonable man is not only directed but driven to the rules of a particular sport when placing a bet in a sporting context. The natural and ordinary meaning of a sporting term is the definition of that term within the rules of that sport. “It would be impossible for a betting business to be run and for it to offer bets on sporting events without reference to the rules of the sports.” The judge added: “I am satisfied that the odds of 2500/1 to a reasonable person placing a bet as well as the reasonable bookmaker would clearly indicate that relegation meant what is contended for by the defenders (Coral) that is, the highly unlikely event.” Lord Bannatyne said he was persuaded that the sound construction of the bet placed was that advanced by the betting firm. He added: “Accordingly, on this construction of the pursuer’s bet it is a losing bet.” 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 "Beyond the river" means, AFAIK, "behind" or "on the other side of" ... a "local preposition" rather than the adjective, synonymous with across. Anyway, when does it start? I have never heard of it or used it but I suppose that doesn't mean it is wrong. I would use across the river or on the other side of the river but I suppose Cary Grant may use beyond the river. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 He lost his case and his bet - " It said Rangers Football Club Plc sold its one share in the SPL to Sevco Scotland following the sale of assets by administrators, which required the approval of at least eight members of the SPL and the application was refused, making it no longer eligible to play in the top tier. It then applied to join the SFL and was permitted to come into the lowest league. Lord Bannatyne said: “The foregoing process cannot be described as being moved by anyone to a lower division, or being moved down or demoted.” The judge said: “I am satisfied that what did not happen was that the SPL moved or demoted Rangers to a lower division. “Rangers ended up in a lower division by the entry into a contract which allowed them to join the SFL in the third division. “I am persuaded that the reasonable man is not only directed but driven to the rules of a particular sport when placing a bet in a sporting context. The natural and ordinary meaning of a sporting term is the definition of that term within the rules of that sport. “It would be impossible for a betting business to be run and for it to offer bets on sporting events without reference to the rules of the sports.” The judge added: “I am satisfied that the odds of 2500/1 to a reasonable person placing a bet as well as the reasonable bookmaker would clearly indicate that relegation meant what is contended for by the defenders (Coral) that is, the highly unlikely event.” Lord Bannatyne said he was persuaded that the sound construction of the bet placed was that advanced by the betting firm. He added: “Accordingly, on this construction of the pursuer’s bet it is a losing bet.” The full court decision is here for anyone interested. It certainly blows the new club debate out of the water. https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=c72b2da7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,294 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 It took me great pains to make this clear to various German news stations, papers and TV channels ... as it is rather uncommon, not least when Germany et al have a strict pyramid system that did not exist in Scotland back then. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 So how did it go today? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 So how did it go today? LOT of talking....no idea whit aboot 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 So how did it go today? The rhabid beggar and full time fool JJ says our guy was "rambling" and did not impress the judges. I think he's in love with the lawyer trying to make us pay. I watched most of it - very dry and full of stated case mentions. Anybody saying they got a decision out of what was heard today is quite simply telling lies. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 The lawyer for HMRC made me think of Columbo. Looks like a dithering idiot but probably as sharp as nails. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.