Proceedings have started on time in the latest case involving Charlton. Lauren Kreamer is representing Panorama Magic, with Paul Chaisty for the applicant, Lex Dominus, as before. Judges are in. Lord Justice Levison and Lord Justice Males.
Chaisty is arguing that Gallen evidence is not relevant, reports Rick Everitt. Respondent has produced no evidence whatsoever to explain state of negotiations with third party in any sale - the current state of play - says Chaisty.
Chaisty: "There is no evidence from the respondent as to what it might lose in terms of financial consideration if an injunction is granted until November. There is total silence in respect of that. No evidence from respondent to show what the position is going to be if an injunction is refused." (reports Richard Cawley)
No evidence as to what contract, price or date of completion or identity of third party, says Chaisty. Extremely important if respondent says irremediable damage if injunction granted. No evidence third party would disappear either. Mihail's evidence is speculation about what risk to the club is in injunction grated, but nothing to show what happens if it isn't - Chaisty (via Rickster)
about the position which might prevail in a range of scenarios. Doomsday scenario disproved by the fact that the club has started the season, says Chaisty. Court left with speculation about potential consequences but with no evidence to form a view as to likelihood.
LJ Lewison says Mihail sets out hypothesis that injunction is granted and LD succeed at trial then ties consequences to that scenario. So to determine whether damages are an adequate solution for Panorama is that injunction is granted by LD loses at trial.
LJ Lewison says that Judge Pearce's ruling may be based on the wrong hypothesis. Chaisty says that MM assumed that Elliott's disqualification is final ruling, which is false.
Elliott pursuing right of appeal with arbitration panel, says Chaisty. EFL disqualification based on misleading evidence provided by Elliott about the SPA. MM's evidence has no foundation because there is an appeal process.
Chaisty saying Paul Elliott pursuing an appeal to overturn the EFL decision on August 7 relating to the OADT ruling."If he succeeds at trial we know damages will not be an adequate remedy. Panorama is a company based in Abu Dhabi with no money."
LJ Males says more fundamental point is whether Mihail has given any evidence about what will happen if injunction granted and claim ultimately fails.
Chaisty saying Mihail's evidence that Elliott can no longer appeal the EFL verdict is "totally misconceived". Basically MM saying that SPA agreement alone wouldn't be enough to push through a deal for CAFC. Chaisty making point that individual can appeal OADT test.
Both judges have wanted Chaisty to focus on Mihail's witness statement, that's why we're on that subject now.
No evidence put forward that EFL embargo will change if the injunction refused, says Chaisty. Mihail suggests club will be expelled if Elliott owns club but cannot be a relevant person under EFL rules. Chaisty says this ignores commercial position for LD.
CAFC Facts and Stats comments, 'Mihail getting hammered again.'
Only statement re third party is that Nimer remains committed to finding a buyer. Court unable to find evidence from Mihail that ESI would suffer any harm from injunction, says Chaisty.
Steve Gallen's evidence criticised for making statements as if they are based on fact. Gallen not now a director of the club, Chaisty tells judges. Gallen explains reason for embargoes, and suggests that cause of them remaining is Elliott's disqualification.
LJ Lewison says not down to Elliott, underlying documents show that ESI has failed to satisfy source and sufficiency of funds. LD hasn't reached that stage with the EFL. LJ Lewison making clear that EFL embargo is down to ESI not passing the governing body's criteria.Chaisty - source and sufficiency of funding for PE has not been dealt with yet. "Mr Gallen is confusing my client with ESI when he says they've had seven months to provide EFL."