QuoteIT. DOESN'T. MATTER. IN. LAW.Originally Posted by micls
You can't just walk away from a legally-binding agreement if the other person doesn't want to, and pretend it never happened.
Just ask Bohs....
So many ups & downs with City best policy unfortunately seems to be to go along with the ride & try not to think about matters can't change
AFAIK Rico had an implied contract. Extension not written but he was paid at new rate.
IT. DOESN'T. MATTER. IN. LAW.
You can't just walk away from a legally-binding agreement if the other person doesn't want to, and pretend it never happened.
Just ask Bohs....
I'll take your word for it. Rumour is our owners think differently because of examinership.
We'll see I guess
The agreed deal was on the table with weeks.
I'm not mixing them up, I don't know where we stand legally so I'm not even considering it. If we don't owe him compensation, it's a good deal; if we do, it's a terrible deal. I've said that quite a few times already
However, I don't see how you could be released from examinership and expected to honour contracts into the future which could put the club right back into trouble, legally that might make sense, but rationally it makes none.
Last edited by tiktok; 09/12/2008 at 9:14 PM.
It's not actually provided specifically in any of the rules relating to examinership as far as I know that you're no longer bound by agreements entered into before examinership. It's still the same company, examinership just gives you a chance to work out a deal with creditors to stop them winding you up. It gives you breathing space. I wouldn't be convinced there's any loophole but we'll see in due course I'm sure. Employees are the most preferential creditor there is also, they rank above even the Revenue.
Last edited by Longfordian; 09/12/2008 at 9:17 PM.
Upwards to the vanguard where the pressure is too high.
My understanding was that the employees would be preferential creditors, but there's a rumour that one player owed wages had to accept 7.5% of them as a creditor, which to me seems strange. Though, you could be right, hopefully the club have examined this carefully before making the decision, because it looks like Mathews will take legal action [which if he has been mistreated, is only right].
lets call a spade a spade ,he was on 150K a year with bonuses included
The lunatic is on the grass
The lunatic is on the grass
Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs
Got to keep the loonies on the path
Thanks Pete, I knew it was recent enough. Should've known it was yourselves...
In non football terms, companies coming out of examinership can't cancel contracts they have with suppliers or customers.
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Danny Drew wasn't actually born as a thorn in Delaney's side either. Give this man time. He's only in the door and has started in real Drew fashion.
The ball is round and has many surprises.
FAI to hit debt-ridden Cork with signing ban
By Daniel McDonnell
Thursday December 11 2008
THE FAI are set to block Cork City from signing new players until they settle debts with their existing squad.
Authorities in Abbotstown are closely monitoring the situation with the Leesiders, who sacked manager Alan Mathews on Tuesday, and compliance officer Padraig Smith will meet with owner Tom Coughlan early next week.
While the association have no distinct rule to deal with such an event, Cork will be informed that they cannot file contracts for new additions until they clarify when they will pay approx €150,000 owed to their existing players.
Cork will also be reminded that they will not qualify for a Premier Division licence unless the issue is settled.
Some players have been receiving money in dribs and drabs, but no firm agreement has been reached on how the monies will be paid or over what period of time.
It is another headache for Coughlan, who also has to deal with the consequences of firing Mathews; the Dubliner is looking for a pay-out of about €300,000 to cover the final two years of his contract.
Meanwhile, Drogheda United are preparing to make an offer to their players for wages they are owed since the club's financial implosion.
- Daniel McDonnell
©Independent.ie
It's all just getting so so messy.
It just boils down to the fact
Scenario 1 : Coughlan did his homework, Mathews old exorbitant contract no longer valid, good luck Alan thanks for the memories.
Scenario 2 : Coughlan made a mistake (a very big & costly one) and Mathews is due a huge payoff of his old and very exorbitant contract.
Mathews is obviously playing the fool in saying he knew nothing of it, it came out of the blue etc etc. what ever boosts his chances of a few bob, who can blame him.
"Must you tell me all your secrets when it's hard enough to love you knowing nothing."
http://worddok.blogspot.com
FAO micls
Alan is one of the most genuine guys in the league and I was talking to him last Thursday and he was really excited about the way Cork were shaping up and he definitely didny have a clue that the rug was about to be pulled from under him.
We are the Galway Boys Stand up and make some noise"
Even in the hopeful scenario that this is the case it does seem like Coughlan financial planning is done on week to week basis. If money is so tight (e.g. cut price sale of Doyle clause) would he not be better letting the entire squad & management go & just start from the first division on part time basis. Sacking a manager to pay for player contracts does not give me confidence about the future.
I reckon he thinks its better to start off at top flight football and it definitely is as regards bringing in revenue
The SFAI are the governing body for grassroots football in Ireland, not the FAI. Its success or the lack of is all down to them.
Our 'exisiting squad' is 8 players and to the best of my knowledge, they've all agreed staged payments on the money owed as part of their renegotiated deals, I think 3 have not yet signed renegotiated deals.FAO micls
We have a number of former players, currently out of contract who we owe money to [which IMO we should have paid back already] who we now are not allowed to sign [because of the ruling] and agree the similar deals with, if I'm reading it correctly.
I worry that there isn't any money there and since it's the off season, i wonder where the money required is going to come from. I can't see this being sorted before Jan 31st unless Coughlan puts his hand in his pocket, in that case we won't get a licence.
We might have been better off in the long run if the examiner had gutted the club in terms of cost cutting and we started aain in Div. 1, looks like we're going to end up in Div.1 anyway but with a larger wage bill and a manager to pay off.
If Mathews is due €300k, we'll owe €450k before next season, we'll be back in examinership before this time next season.
Why do you think you'll start in Division 1 instead of the A Championship?
(Genuine question)
Shels (genuine answer).
If there hadn't been a precedent set when they should have been kicked out, I'd be more worried. The only issue outstanding with regard to licencing is the payments to players (assuming we haven't managed to run up another tax bill in a month) when it comes down to it, I think we'll sort that out in time.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks