Annabel
Well-Known Member
- Feb 2, 2005
- 2,374
- 4,780
Dave Dove?
SPURS V ARCHWAY K.O. 10.30 AM 17/2/2015
- Thread starter prawnsandwich
- Start date
Dave Dove?
Spurger King
can't smile without glue
- Jul 22, 2008
- 43,881
- 95,149
'Mettle', maybe?
That's the joke.
Geyzer Soze
Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd
- Aug 16, 2010
- 26,056
- 63,362
Metalhead
But that's a debate for another thread.....
- Nov 24, 2013
- 25,437
- 38,488
That cracked me up
- Jun 5, 2004
- 32,221
- 64,290
- Staff
- #46
Yeah, most of us already know you're a lawyer
Suck my hours, bitch. And then I'll bill you all over your face.
Geyzer Soze
Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd
- Aug 16, 2010
- 26,056
- 63,362
Oh i know you will dude, I know you will!! I get billed all over my face on a regular basis!!
(caveat: I am fooling. I have no beef with Lawyers!)
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
Sanj
Well-Known Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 1,680
- 1,130
Oooh !! i love a conspiracy theory.
The FA?
The premier league?
Fifa?
The illuminati?
They've never wanted us to succeed - currupt so and so's.....
Seriously tho, BC - who would want to fund them and waste all this money?
ilya
Well-Known Member
- Aug 23, 2013
- 464
- 1,368
225
Living in hope, existing in disappointment
- Dec 15, 2014
- 4,563
- 9,064
From what I can read so far, they've outlined that the Josef's own the land in the way of the stadium.
Then they've covered the reiteration by Haringey Council & THFC that the funding to start/complete the project exists and is available.
Sounds like the QC for Archway is trying to invalidate the planning permission by challenging it. He said that when the council have give the 'ok' for a building to be constructed, the plans are completely valid unless someone challenges that permission or provides otherwise that the building shouldn't be approved. It then sounds like the QC has reference a case law from the 1940's which proves that the planning permission is only revoked upon a successful challenge, rather than a submission of a challenge.
What I think he's then saying is that the plans for the stadium haven't been fully granted with planning permission, and are still relatively fluid (i.e. the stadium could change and still be valid for planning).
Because of the lack of a confirmed building plan, he seems to be saying that there can't be a valid CPO - i.e. you can't force someone to move when you haven't even got full approval of the plan to construct the stadium from the council.
That's the best I can do, I think it's about right?
Then they've covered the reiteration by Haringey Council & THFC that the funding to start/complete the project exists and is available.
Sounds like the QC for Archway is trying to invalidate the planning permission by challenging it. He said that when the council have give the 'ok' for a building to be constructed, the plans are completely valid unless someone challenges that permission or provides otherwise that the building shouldn't be approved. It then sounds like the QC has reference a case law from the 1940's which proves that the planning permission is only revoked upon a successful challenge, rather than a submission of a challenge.
What I think he's then saying is that the plans for the stadium haven't been fully granted with planning permission, and are still relatively fluid (i.e. the stadium could change and still be valid for planning).
Because of the lack of a confirmed building plan, he seems to be saying that there can't be a valid CPO - i.e. you can't force someone to move when you haven't even got full approval of the plan to construct the stadium from the council.
That's the best I can do, I think it's about right?
Metalhead
But that's a debate for another thread.....
- Nov 24, 2013
- 25,437
- 38,488
I agree. I just see this as Archway doing it under their own steam and for their own reasons (rightly or wrongly depending on which side of the fence you stand). Mind you, I am not one for conspiracy theories in the first place.
Flashspur
Well-Known Member
- Jul 28, 2012
- 6,883
- 9,069
As a lawyer you get used to judges timeframes around decisions and this one won't see light of day for a couple of weeks. They love to retire to chambers after the hearing, throw off their silks, loosen the ladies garter belt and silk stockings they put on that morning and snort back a glass of cognac with a nice maduro colored Cuban perfecto cigar perfectly guillotined and lit with a flourish. Then idly mull over it all. I'd be very surprised if you got a decision today.
mil1lion
This is the place to be
- May 7, 2004
- 42,558
- 78,201
Thank God Michael Owen isn't commentating on this one. I'd probably be bored into a deep coma and miss the Cup Final.
Ossie'sAardvark
Well-Known Member
- Aug 20, 2013
- 2,073
- 2,210
This case is riveting.
Dirty Ewok
Well-Known Member
- Aug 29, 2012
- 9,060
- 19,530
Sounds about right..
.
.
punkisback
Well-Known Member
- Apr 10, 2004
- 4,423
- 7,291
Wouldn't surprise me if they were originally from Archway, i.e. Goonerland, making them die hard stubborn gooners.
