Page 14 of todays Star has the details on allegations that there was a prior deal with the owners of the Phibsboro Shopping Centre before Bohs agreed the sale of the ground to Liam Carroll.
Printable View
Page 14 of todays Star has the details on allegations that there was a prior deal with the owners of the Phibsboro Shopping Centre before Bohs agreed the sale of the ground to Liam Carroll.
any chance you can scan the article or type up the main points if you have time?
Bohs set for ground row talks
Soccer club bohs is prepared to engage in mediation in a row over the €35m sale of its home ground, the commercial court heard yesterday
Bohs claims it sold dalyer ina deal under which the club will get a new stadium in harristown
it claims the move may be delayed because the construction companies with interests in fizzboro shopping centre allege they had a prior deal
case was adjourned
Title of thread should be "Bohs Deal goes to Mediation". It's not arbitration, big difference.
What does this mean?
Albion, who own, and are planning to redevelop Phibsboro' SC, claim that they had a verbal agreement with Bohs involving the sale of a portion of Dalymount (tramway end) to Albion to facilitate this redevelopment, and that Bohs deal with Liam Carroll violates this prior agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingdomkerry
Bohs - and the Judge - want both parties to go to an agreed mediator and try and sort this out before going back to court
Surely a verbal agreement isn't worth the paper it's written on?
Any legal heads on here?
A verbal contract has the same legal standing as a written contact when it comes to sale of land.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
But how do you prove what was said, unless they have it recorded? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by rebelarmyexile
The relevant piece of legislation seems to be the fairly antique "statute of frauds" - verbal contracts are not binding in a handful of situations, including sales of Real Property (real estate, easements, etc.) In these cases you must have a written contract.
Maybe I'm misreading it though.
It's still not "arbitration".
I thought this was a done deal... not like Bohs to make an arse or something!
That's the nub of it really. As far as I remember a verbal agreement can be binding, but you'd need some pretty solid proof of what was said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raheny Red
I suppose the fact that Bohs included the following note on page 1 of their own accounts for the year ended 30th November 2005 might have somethign to do with it:
"The losses of the company currently stand at apprixamately (sic) €0.72m. The company has undertaken a number of plans to utilise the company's resources and generate income. These plans include:
- the sale of a small part of land to Albion Enterprises Limited has been agreed at €720,000, in addition to the provision of corporate boxes at no cost. Of this amount, the company has already received funds in the sum of €600,000, with a further €120,000 receivable immediately. The company is also to receive a further €650,000 from Albion Enterprises Limited in compensation for the delay in the provision of the corporate boxes. The total monies receivable are to be paid to the company by way of monthly instalments of €100,000, beginning January 2006 until the balance is settled in full."
I'm guessing that something happened to that deal (e.g. Albion didn't pay up or a deadline expired).
It doesn't sound good for Bohs!
Are these yearly payments from the new lad stopped until the mess is sorted ? I seem to remember unconditional funds to the tune of 1 or 2 million coming your way for 5 years regardless of the deal ever closing.
It'd teach me a lesson for having two teams if United under the Glazers win all around them this year with Liverpool's Yanks forcing out Benítez, and Rovers get their ground in Tallaght and Bohs end up homeless ...
If I could be bothered I drag up the posts from the Bohez fans on here when the property deal was announced who, when some people were less than convinced, scorned any negative posts and said it was a no lose deal.
There's enough lessons out there in the EL that when amateur football administrators deal with professional hard-nosed property speculators they are out of their depth and more often than not get shafted.
I hope Bohs get out of this one intact, but I'll shed no tears if they don't get the full value of the promised windfall.
I always thought they had sold off that section of land. Isn't that the reason the Jodi stand doesn't go the full way up the pitch? because it would have been too long when the land sold was gone.
Hopefully they can get out of the previous agreement and sell for the 35million to Liam but it doesn't sound like it will happen.
It's a bit mad nobody thought about this when they went ahead with the deal, would it have been backed by so many if they thought it was already sold.