0
    0

    Comment on Dear Mr Bankier by John Clark.

    Haudthebus 14th December 2018 at 13:20

    '..How were we to know he was referencing the Ancient Mariner.'

    ____________________________________

    One of my favourite poems.

    But I remember struggling with 'barred sun' . I had never seen a 'barred sun' over the skies of east Glasgow, or anywhere else, and I don't think my teacher had, either! 

    Years later, when my own first child was about four, I came across a magnificently  illustrated children's version which showed exactly what a 'barred sun' looks like. 

    I have over the years tried to remember that book, which I had borrowed from Dublin City libraries in about 1976 or so, when I was stationed there.

     

    John Clark Also Commented

    Dear Mr Bankier
    It's what, half-past one-ish p.m in Edinburgh? 

    Lady Wolffe will presumably by now have been informed by whoever keeps the diary of 'deadline' dates as to whether King has obeyed her order to the satisfaction of the TOP.

    When will we, the 'public', hear whether the Court has been given the two fingers or whether King's legal bods have prevailed upon him to obey?

    I am agog with excitement!!!. 

    No, really, I expect some fudge, some work-around, some 'arrangement' will have been reached under which King will have generously agreed to accommodate Lady Wolffe and the TOP in the interests of moving on, having made his point etc etc etc.

     


    Dear Mr Bankier
    joes11 17th December 2018 at 09:27

    '….Is it possible to have information about the response, if any, that there has been to these questions – if not in detail, perhaps even a general indication of where things have now reached? '

    ___________________________

    Somewhat related to your post, here am I in Australia, joes11, wishing to ask whether Mr Bankier has replied to my letter to him. I am conscious of the possibility that he may have replied since I left on my travels, and his reply may be lying on my hall floor as I write, so I would like to know for sure. 

    But, by geez, these guys don't half make it hard to communicate with them: there is no email address given on the Celtic plc website even for any PA  that Mr Bankier may have, never mind an email address for the  Chairman himself. 

    So I cannot simply email to ask whether a reply has been made, and if so what were the terms of that reply: and if not, whether I am to be favoured with a reply at all!

     

     

     


    Dear Mr Bankier
    sickofitall 16th December 2018 at 07:47

    '…Have they complied with the court orders yet'

    ___________________________

    Patience, sickofitall!

    The deadline was 5.30 pm on a Friday. The Court of Session is not open for business for another 19 hours or so as I write.

    So Lady Wolffe will not officially know whether the TOP has confirmed that King has done to their satisfaction what she ordered him to do.

    And I'm with eJ in his observation that Lady Wolffe made it abundantly clear to King he has to pay heed, and careful heed, to the terms of the order.

    If Lady Wolffe does not tomorrow morning have written notice from the TOP that King had by 5.30 pm on last Friday met to their satisfaction the terms of the order then King is in soapy bubble.

    Absolutely.

    But my fear is that the TOP itself might too readily accept some token compliance, rather than nail the guy. Remember, the TOP is made up of guys who are themselves 'money men' operating in the market: and a bit like, say, the members of the SFA, will not want to push 'principle' too far. 

    I came across this quite interesting piece

    https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2018/06/enforcing-takeover-panels-decisions-panel-v-king-2018-csih-30

     


    Recent Comments by John Clark

    In Whose Interests
    Higgy's Shoes 19th September 2019 at 12:57

    "Thomas Meunier and Juan Bernat capered through the open savannah that archaeologists believe was once populated by the Real Madrid midfield"

    ++++++++++++++++++++++

    That quote is worthy of the late Cyril Horne and Ian Archer.

    As for Aidan (I think that is the spelling) O'Neill QC I had the pleasure of sitting a few feet from him when he delivered the 'incontinent mendacity' observation.


    In Whose Interests
    easyJambo 18th September 2019 at 22:21

    '.. I don't believe that Hearts needed a DOF role..'

    ++++++++++++++

    eJ, I have only the vaguest notion of what a Director of Football is, or what his 'powers' are.

    Isn't  CL merely an employee? As 'sackable' at the Board's pleasure as Caldwell today or indeed any football manager?

    Or does being a 'director of football' give him the status and voting power of a Board member holding a significant number of shares?

     

     

     

     

     


    In Whose Interests
    Quote from O'Neill QC: "the mother of Parliaments being shut down by the Father of Lies" in his closing speech at the Supreme Court , a few minutes ago.


    In Whose Interests
    Higgy's Shoes 17th September 2019 at 12:51

    '.. RIP Bobby Prentice. ..'

    +++++++++++++++

    I've just watched that wonderful clip, and called Mrs C in from whatever she is watching on TV to see it.

    Wasn't that kind of dribbling skill, leaving defenders for dead, what most of us as kids ( well, of my generation anyway)would have wished to possess? The other guys that won the tackles and got the ball free to you to allow you to run were absolutely necessary, of course.

    But the  thrill of it all, as you cut your way through lumpen challenges, and avoided being scythed down and being able to get your shot in! Nothing to beat it!

     Or so I am told, I myself never having really been anywhere near achieving anything like that level of skill. (Well, okay, okay, okay! I was never even sure of being picked for the second eleven  even in primary school!)

      But that wee clip epitomises what the sport of football is all about. (including suspect refereeing decisions!)broken heart


    In Whose Interests
    One trivial thing I noticed in the Court proceedings today , and also last week in the Court of Session, was the use of the word 'electronic' by Counsel when referring to non-paper 'documents' that they wished the judge(s) to look at.

    Perhaps eJ might keep me right, but up until last week's hearings, I think that Counsel and the Bench just used the word 'digital' to distinguish betwen the 'electronic' record ( most of the judges I've seen use whatever they're called- I-pads or whatever, only two that I have seen still depend on folders of paper documents); so you would hear Counsel say something like 'in Volume I, page 10, my Lord, digital ,xyz'.

    I wonder whether at some UK level an understanding had been reached that the word 'electronic' rather than 'digital'  should be used as standard terminology?

    Of course, it is a little known fact that I have been known to nod off in the Court of Session, and maybe the use of 'electronic' has been the vogue for some time and I haven't noticed!

    Given that to me 'digital' conjures up long ago images and sounds of hospital beds and plastic gloves being snapped on , I'm rather glad if its use in Courts has been discontinued!angry