Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

High Court dates confirmed - LDC press release



Muhammad - I’m hard - Bruce Lee

You can't change fighters
NSC Patron
Jul 25, 2005
10,911
on a pig farm
Albaman said:
I thought as the Lord Bracknell stated, whatever happens its ~100% retursn to being a Government decision. Anything else would be unprecented in law and therefore we would have a strong case to overturn any overturn. This is completely the LibDumbs strategy of trying to make us go bust or be franchised before the final Yes is given.
so if the case gets returned to government, and they reach the same decision.....can LDC appeal again?
 






Tom Hark Preston Park

Will Post For Cash
Jul 6, 2003
72,350
sullyupthewing said:
Yes they can.
Court of Appeal.
House of Lords.
European court of human rights.
You name it they will try it, anything to delay and break the club.

Even more reason to do everything legal to boot them out of office ASAP. I mean, it's not like they even represent their constituents on this one anymore. They're just doing their own sweet thing that was decided behind closed doors. And it will all end in tears. These individual councillors will go under, by democratic, non-violent means, long before the albion do. Er, innit :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:


Lord Bracknell said:
The Government have already conceded that the issue of the built up area has been incorrectly dealt with.

Therefore the answer to your question is that it is ONE HUNDRED PER CENT CERTAIN that the Court will refer the matter back to the Secretary of State.

Lewes District Council are simply trying to delay a decision that could have been taken WEEKS AGO, without the need for a Court hearing.

Dare I ask, but I guess Lewes could just appeal against another Ruth Kelly decision in our favour - and the farce could carry on even longer?

I know they've sort of indicated that they wouldn't, but they've said a lot of things, similar to Norman Baker saying he hoped all sides would accept John Prescott's verdict.
 


Colbourne Kid

Member
Sep 19, 2003
351
The reality of all this and the most likely outcome is that Lewes will find some way to accept the Government's agreement letter at the last minute thereby preventing the court case and saving an awards of costs against them.

They will however, by then, have delayed this another 5 months. Their whole strategy is based on delay in the hope that the Club goes bust.

There is no way they will go to court.
 




Halftime Oranges

New member
Oct 22, 2003
2,324
Rottingdean
can LDC appeal again if it then is reffered back to the government and we get green light again???
 


Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,761
Buxted Harbour
Re: Falmer court hearing set for 5 Dec 2006

Mike C Gull said:
BBC Southern Counties Story


Another 4 1/2 :censored: months until it is resolved.

*smirk*

Yeah right!!

Which ever way it goes in December if you think that'll be it resolved you're living in cloud cuckoo land.

Won't be built for another 10 years at least, maybe never at all. FACT!
 


essbee

New member
Jan 5, 2005
3,656
arthur,

whoever you are I think you should take your negative
pro-LDC thoughts and leave this board, because you're
talking rubbish
 




The Clown of Pevensey Bay

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
4,340
Suburbia
sullyupthewing said:
Yes they can.
Court of Appeal.
House of Lords.
European court of human rights.
You name it they will try it, anything to delay and break the club.

I should think that the government lawyers will refer the High Court judge to the point made in the case quoted in Lord B's signature. Any deviation from that by the European Court of Human Rights would require a radical change to European law. Lewes DC, however annoying they are, are not going to bring that about.
 




Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,761
Buxted Harbour
essbee said:
arthur,

whoever you are I think you should take your negative
pro-LDC thoughts and leave this board, because you're
talking rubbish

Me thinks some of you people need to take your blue and white tinted spectacles off.

I'm not in the slightest pro LDC. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than seeing my football club run out at a brand spanking new ground where ever it may be. However (if you feel this is being negative then that's up to you) I just can't see Falmer happening!!

It's been problem after problem after problem. I remember speaking to Martin Perry around 99 and he said we could realistically be playing football at Falmer at the start of the 2003/04 season.

There is nothing to suggest that even if come December 7th we're cock-a-hoop once again that ANother issue will be found some where down the pipeline.

Some of you people are so blinkered it's just not funny, a bloke a few weeks back made the shocking statement that he thought maybe Falmer wasn't the right choice and some of you were practically offering to rape his wife and murder his children!!

Perry and Knight have thrown all of our eggs in to one basket and spent an awful lot of money doing it which ultimately could cost this football clubs life. We have no choice but to trust them but their has to be a point when we say enough is enough, stop wasting the clubs money on something that may not happen.

In my eyes it's 50-50 as to which way it'll go, is it worth risking the life of this football club with odds like that?

I await my :flameboun
 
Last edited:






Curious Orange

Punxsatawney Phil
Jul 5, 2003
10,227
On NSC for over two decades...
Arthur said:
Me thinks some of you people need to take your blue and white tinted spectacles off.

I'm not in the slightest pro LDC. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than seeing my football club run out at a brand spanking new ground where ever it may be. However (if you feel this is being negative then that's up to you) I just can't see Falmer happening!!

It's been problem after problem after problem. I remember speaking to Martin Perry around 99 and he said we could realistically be playing football at Falmer at the start of the 2003/04 season.

There is nothing to suggest that even if come December 7th we're cock-a-hoop once again that ANother issue will be found some where down the pipeline.

Some of you people are so blinkered it's just not funny, a bloke a few weeks back made the shocking statement that he thought maybe Falmer wasn't the right choice and some of you were practically offering to rape his wife and murder his children!!

Perry and Knight have thrown all of our eggs in to one basket and spent an awful lot of money doing it which ultimately could cost this football clubs life. We have no choice but to trust them but their has to be a point when we say enough is enough, stop wasting the clubs money on something that may not happen.

In my eyes it's 50-50 as to which way it'll go, is it worth risking the life of this football club with odds like that?

I await my :flameboun

Have you read the Inspectors' reports?
 


Dave the OAP

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
46,762
at home
Arthur said:
Me thinks some of you people need to take your blue and white tinted spectacles off.

I'm not in the slightest pro LDC. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than seeing my football club run out at a brand spanking new ground where ever it may be. However (if you feel this is being negative then that's up to you) I just can't see Falmer happening!!

It's been problem after problem after problem. I remember speaking to Martin Perry around 99 and he said we could realistically be playing football at Falmer at the start of the 2003/04 season.

There is nothing to suggest that even if come December 7th we're cock-a-hoop once again that ANother issue will be found some where down the pipeline.

Some of you people are so blinkered it's just not funny, a bloke a few weeks back made the shocking statement that he thought maybe Falmer wasn't the right choice and some of you were practically offering to rape his wife and murder his children!!

Perry and Knight have thrown all of our eggs in to one basket and spent an awful lot of money doing it which ultimately could cost this football clubs life. We have no choice but to trust them but their has to be a point when we say enough is enough, stop wasting the clubs money on something that may not happen.

In my eyes it's 50-50 as to which way it'll go, is it worth risking the life of this football club with odds like that?

I await my :flameboun


I appreciate what you are saying and in some way agree with you, however, we have gone too far down the road to have a No now.

People know on here that I am of the opinion it will fail at some point, however I am prepared to back the Board in their efforts as I also believe that Falmer is the only place available.

That is the issue here.

The council have backed themselves into a corner by suggesting that Waterhall, which every man woman and child in B&H knows is the prefect place for the ground and furthe development to sustain it, is not available becuase no development must take place North of the bypass....Oh yes, apart from Brighton Rugby club grounds, clubhouse, the new astro turf pitches etc etc. I am still of the opinion B&H knew we would have horrendous problems getting Falmer passed, but saw it as the only option available.

Which brings me back to Withdean. For the short term future of the club, Withdean would be fine if we could negotiate some sort of deal to allow us to derive income from it to alleviate the losses( I have no idea what that would be) Long term, and to match the ambition of the fans, it is not ( Planning, bridge etc etc), therefore all the eggs are in one basket and Falmer is that basket.
 
Last edited:




Gwylan

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
31,830
Uffern
Arthur said:

Some of you people are so blinkered it's just not funny, a bloke a few weeks back made the shocking statement that he thought maybe Falmer wasn't the right choice and some of you were practically offering to rape his wife and murder his children!!


Actually, on NSC they'd be more likely be offering to murder him and rape his wife AND children.

I can see your point about delay after delay but that's really a reflection of the shocking state of planning law in this country.

We're not alone in this: Southampton had to wait years for St Mary's to be approved and Portsmouth, Cardiff and Barnet (among others) are facing hold-ups with their new stadia.
 


blockhseagull

Well-known member
Jan 30, 2006
7,364
Southampton
Gwylan said:
Actually, on NSC they'd be more likely be offering to murder him and rape his wife AND children.

I can see your point about delay after delay but that's really a reflection of the shocking state of planning law in this country.

We're not alone in this: Southampton had to wait years for St Mary's to be approved and Portsmouth, Cardiff and Barnet (among others) are facing hold-ups with their new stadia.


Southampton and Portsmouth are completely different.

Southampton were given St Marys by the council as it was in an area marked for regeneration and was pushed through quite quickly their problems were when they were attempting to build their ground at Stoneham and Portsmouth's problems have been due to acquiring the land around Fratton Park.

No-one anywhere has had to wait 10 years !!!!
 


Gwylan

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
31,830
Uffern
Dies Irae said:

The council have backed themselves into a corner by suggesting that Waterhall, which every man woman and child in B&H knows is the prefect place for the ground and furthe development to sustain it, is not available becuase no development must take place North of the bypass....Oh yes, apart from Brighton Rugby club grounds, clubhouse, the new astro turf pitches etc etc. I am still of the opinion B&H knew we would have horrendous problems getting Falmer passed, but saw it as the only option available.


AFAIK, Waterhall failed primarily because it was not accessible by sustainable transport (ie you can't walk from the station).

I believe that it's also in the AONB but I'm sure someone else can confirm that.
 


Dave the OAP

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
46,762
at home
Gwylan said:
AFAIK, Waterhall failed primarily because it was not accessible by sustainable transport (ie you can't walk from the station).

I believe that it's also in the AONB but I'm sure someone else can confirm that.

What does AFIAK mean?


No , it failed because the council has a plan that says nothing can be built North of the Bypass and if planning permission would be sought, we would not get it.

You cant walk from Huddersfields Station, or Derby, or Coventry, or Leicester, or Southampton...........
 




Everest

Me
Jul 5, 2003
20,741
Southwick
blockhseagull said:
No-one anywhere has had to wait 10 years !!!!
Until now!
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here