Here We go again:Cardiff ready to sue Nantes for up to £200m

I do see that this is a divisive matter but every single person on this topic is just guessing (I include myself in this) as we simply haven’t seen the court papers from either side.

As I have said previously. The civil courts will decide at High Court level. If there is a case brought that doesn’t have a “reasonable” prospect of success then the judge, at an early stage, will indicate that in a public hearing and/or issue a summary judgment dismissing the claim.

I would suggest we wait for that before making our own judgements on the validity of Tan’s actions.

Glad youve agreed that your guessing.

Listen I stated 4 yrs ago Emiliano was 100% our player, i got by the usual suspects saying exactly what your saying once again.
Have YOU and the others forgot you backed Tan on that and for me that was very low.

Emiliano was our player and Tan has been proven wrong on three different occasions.

Now hes blaming Nantes for what happened, I can state now, NO Case for Nantes to answer.
Plus why do you think the courts have thrown it all out and Tan has been told your only option now is Civil as hes been proved wrong time and time again.

IT WAS NOT CARDIFF CITY'S OR NANTES FAULT / IT WAS THE AGENT & PILOT'S FOR THE LAST TIME.

Annis, please understand, when we say we are guessing, it often comes from a point of some knowledge of the legal system.

Also, and more importantly, these guesses are to TRY and make sense of WHY Tan continues to seek legal recourse. Someone is saying there is a case to answer, otherwise why continue.

You are right, fault seems to lie at the feet of agents and pilots. One of whom has been jailed.

I do see that this is a divisive matter but every single person on this topic is just guessing (I include myself in this) as we simply haven’t seen the court papers from either side.

As I have said previously. The civil courts will decide at High Court level. If there is a case brought that doesn’t have a “reasonable” prospect of success then the judge, at an early stage, will indicate that in a public hearing and/or issue a summary judgment dismissing the claim.

I would suggest we wait for that before making our own judgements on the validity of Tan’s actions.

Glad youve agreed that your guessing.

Listen I stated 4 yrs ago Emiliano was 100% our player, i got by the usual suspects saying exactly what your saying once again.
Have YOU and the others forgot you backed Tan on that and for me that was very low.

Emiliano was our player and Tan has been proven wrong on three different occasions.

Now hes blaming Nantes for what happened, I can state now, NO Case for Nantes to answer.
Plus why do you think the courts have thrown it all out and Tan has been told your only option now is Civil as hes been proved wrong time and time again.

IT WAS NOT CARDIFF CITY'S OR NANTES FAULT / IT WAS THE AGENT & PILOT'S FOR THE LAST TIME.

Annis, please understand, when we say we are guessing, it often comes from a point of some knowledge of the legal system.

Also, and more importantly, these guesses are to TRY and make sense of WHY Tan continues to seek legal recourse. Someone is saying there is a case to answer, otherwise why continue.

You are right, fault seems to lie at the feet of agents and pilots. One of whom has been jailed.

That’s fair enough Wayne


But Tan does not like paying anyone and goes to battle / court with nearly everyone and if he thinks he has the smallest chance in the World in winning, been ehen the odds are stacked against him, he goes for it, but I can say this out of say 12-14 cases he won one against Michael Isaak who took him to court and I said then Isaaks was wrong because as a fellow shareholder, I knew was in his right to devalue the shares as he is by far the majority shareholder.

These cases have become, costly and have made us look idiots as a club.
I wish he would concentrate on running our club better on a day to day basic instead.

I do see that this is a divisive matter but every single person on this topic is just guessing (I include myself in this) as we simply haven’t seen the court papers from either side.

As I have said previously. The civil courts will decide at High Court level. If there is a case brought that doesn’t have a “reasonable” prospect of success then the judge, at an early stage, will indicate that in a public hearing and/or issue a summary judgment dismissing the claim.

I would suggest we wait for that before making our own judgements on the validity of Tan’s actions.

Glad youve agreed that your guessing.

Listen I stated 4 yrs ago Emiliano was 100% our player, i got by the usual suspects saying exactly what your saying once again.
Have YOU and the others forgot you backed Tan on that and for me that was very low.

Emiliano was our player and Tan has been proven wrong on three different occasions.

Now hes blaming Nantes for what happened, I can state now, NO Case for Nantes to answer.
Plus why do you think the courts have thrown it all out and Tan has been told your only option now is Civil as hes been proved wrong time and time again.

IT WAS NOT CARDIFF CITY'S OR NANTES FAULT / IT WAS THE AGENT & PILOT'S FOR THE LAST TIME.

Annis, please understand, when we say we are guessing, it often comes from a point of some knowledge of the legal system.

Also, and more importantly, these guesses are to TRY and make sense of WHY Tan continues to seek legal recourse. Someone is saying there is a case to answer, otherwise why continue.

You are right, fault seems to lie at the feet of agents and pilots. One of whom has been jailed.

That’s fair enough Wayne


But Tan does not like paying anyone and goes to battle / court with nearly everyone and if he thinks he has the smallest chance in the World in winning, been ehen the odds are stacked against him, he goes for it, but I can say this out of say 12-14 cases he won one against Michael Isaak who took him to court and I said then Isaaks was wrong because as a fellow shareholder, I knew was in his right to devalue the shares as he is by far the majority shareholder.

These cases have become, costly and have made us look idiots as a club.
I wish he would concentrate on running our club better on a day to day basic instead.

I’ve never claimed to “know” always just my opinion.

Are you also admitting to guessing ? Because when I said “ALL” I meant ALL.

Agree with Paul Keevils appraisal. Think that’s how it will play out.

Sadly, after speaking to someone today and checking a few facts, it seems Paul's assessment is a little wide of the mark in some areas but in others we might have a case...

In simple terms, it has now been confirmed (via three Courts) that Emiliano Sala became our player the moment he put pen to paper and BEFORE his trip back to Nantes. The issues surrounding his 'registration' to play in the Premier League was a separate issue not linked to FC Nantes

He was asked by the Bluebird hierarchy to travel up to Newcastle to meet his new team mates but requested he be allowed to return to say his goodbyes. This request was granted by the club's hierarchy and they offered to arrange transport for him because he was their player and they wanted to help

That offer of a flight was turned down, as the player asked HIS AGENT (something I'd forgotten) the very same Willie McKay representing FC Nantes to help

I recently listened to the Transfer documentary on BBC sound and Without getting bogged down in this Willie McKay was never Sala’s agent he only ever represented Nantes and he admits this in one of the episodes
What is important here is that McKay had carried out his duties to FC Nantes and was now helping/representing his 'other' client, Emiliano Sala

That being the case, where can FC Nantes be seen as culpable and/or liable?

For me, they cannot and I am now of the opinion that whatever route the club (ahem, Vincent Tan) decides to take, FC Nantes will not be brought to book over the actual transfer or the sad events that follows

Chasing others appears futile other than for 'blame' purposes and it has and will continue to hit/hurt our club's ability to move forward

For me, it's time for Mr Tan to call off the dogs, pay what is owed and move on, as there is little to be gained (certainly not financial) from doing anything else...

I recently listened to the Transfer documentary regarding the Sala tragedy on BBC sounds and Willie McKay openly admits that he only ever represented Nantes and was never Sala’s agent.

Andrew, that's interesting and thank you. But the fact remains McKay was not acting on behalf of FC Nantes when the tragedy occurred. He was helping Emiliano, who was our player at that point...

I don’t think we have much of a case tbh but I would encourage anyone to listen to the documentary as it is both tragic and interesting in equal parts and surprisingly Willie McKay actually comes across as a tidy fella who after he made his money was genuinely trying to help out Sala

Agree with Paul Keevils appraisal. Think that’s how it will play out.

Sadly, after speaking to someone today and checking a few facts, it seems Paul's assessment is a little wide of the mark in some areas but in others we might have a case...

In simple terms, it has now been confirmed (via three Courts) that Emiliano Sala became our player the moment he put pen to paper and BEFORE his trip back to Nantes. The issues surrounding his 'registration' to play in the Premier League was a separate issue not linked to FC Nantes

He was asked by the Bluebird hierarchy to travel up to Newcastle to meet his new team mates but requested he be allowed to return to say his goodbyes. This request was granted by the club's hierarchy and they offered to arrange transport for him because he was their player and they wanted to help

That offer of a flight was turned down, as the player asked HIS AGENT (something I'd forgotten) the very same Willie McKay representing FC Nantes to help

I recently listened to the Transfer documentary on BBC sound and Without getting bogged down in this Willie McKay was never Sala’s agent he only ever represented Nantes and he admits this in one of the episodes
What is important here is that McKay had carried out his duties to FC Nantes and was now helping/representing his 'other' client, Emiliano Sala

That being the case, where can FC Nantes be seen as culpable and/or liable?

For me, they cannot and I am now of the opinion that whatever route the club (ahem, Vincent Tan) decides to take, FC Nantes will not be brought to book over the actual transfer or the sad events that follows

Chasing others appears futile other than for 'blame' purposes and it has and will continue to hit/hurt our club's ability to move forward

For me, it's time for Mr Tan to call off the dogs, pay what is owed and move on, as there is little to be gained (certainly not financial) from doing anything else...

I recently listened to the Transfer documentary regarding the Sala tragedy on BBC sounds and Willie McKay openly admits that he only ever represented Nantes and was never Sala’s agent.

Andrew, that's interesting and thank you. But the fact remains McKay was not acting on behalf of FC Nantes when the tragedy occurred. He was helping Emiliano, who was our player at that point...

I don’t think we have much of a case tbh but I would encourage anyone to listen to the documentary as it is both tragic and interesting in equal parts and surprisingly Willie McKay actually comes across as a tidy fella who after he made his money was genuinely trying to help out Sala

He never made his money and he was never paid out ,the payments were stopped , also none of us have seen the sales contract I was 100% told that the sales contract not the fifa registration had said that sala had to be registered with the premier league which he wasn't, cas or fifa couldn't rule on that they said they could only rule of the players registration.

Agree with Paul Keevils appraisal. Think that’s how it will play out.

Sadly, after speaking to someone today and checking a few facts, it seems Paul's assessment is a little wide of the mark in some areas but in others we might have a case...

In simple terms, it has now been confirmed (via three Courts) that Emiliano Sala became our player the moment he put pen to paper and BEFORE his trip back to Nantes. The issues surrounding his 'registration' to play in the Premier League was a separate issue not linked to FC Nantes

He was asked by the Bluebird hierarchy to travel up to Newcastle to meet his new team mates but requested he be allowed to return to say his goodbyes. This request was granted by the club's hierarchy and they offered to arrange transport for him because he was their player and they wanted to help

That offer of a flight was turned down, as the player asked HIS AGENT (something I'd forgotten) the very same Willie McKay representing FC Nantes to help

I recently listened to the Transfer documentary on BBC sound and Without getting bogged down in this Willie McKay was never Sala’s agent he only ever represented Nantes and he admits this in one of the episodes
What is important here is that McKay had carried out his duties to FC Nantes and was now helping/representing his 'other' client, Emiliano Sala

That being the case, where can FC Nantes be seen as culpable and/or liable?

For me, they cannot and I am now of the opinion that whatever route the club (ahem, Vincent Tan) decides to take, FC Nantes will not be brought to book over the actual transfer or the sad events that follows

Chasing others appears futile other than for 'blame' purposes and it has and will continue to hit/hurt our club's ability to move forward

For me, it's time for Mr Tan to call off the dogs, pay what is owed and move on, as there is little to be gained (certainly not financial) from doing anything else...

I recently listened to the Transfer documentary regarding the Sala tragedy on BBC sounds and Willie McKay openly admits that he only ever represented Nantes and was never Sala’s agent.

Andrew, that's interesting and thank you. But the fact remains McKay was not acting on behalf of FC Nantes when the tragedy occurred. He was helping Emiliano, who was our player at that point...

I don’t think we have much of a case tbh but I would encourage anyone to listen to the documentary as it is both tragic and interesting in equal parts and surprisingly Willie McKay actually comes across as a tidy fella who after he made his money was genuinely trying to help out Sala

He never made his money and he was never paid out ,the payments were stopped , also none of us have seen the sales contract I was 100% told that the sales contract not the fifa registration had said that sala had to be registered with the premier league which he wasn't, cas or fifa couldn't rule on that they said they could only rule of the players registration.

I’m only repeating what was said on the documentary but I’ve always thought that if Sala refused to sign the new contract with considerably less signing on fee upfront where would that leave all parties ?

If he wouldn't sign the new contract then he would be a free agent imo as Nantes had sold him and ccfc had voided the 1st contract.
Lot of differing views on here but I think we can all agree on it being a truly tragic sequence of events which could have been prevented.

Something that we havent covered here is the Limitation Act.

In a personal injury claim the limitation period is 3 years. Money or debt claims are 6 years. Aviation claims are 2 years.

That is to say any claim needs to be made within 2 years else the claim is likely to fail on time (unless the court grants a section 33 waiver)

It does sound as though this claim has only recently been made.

If this is the case ALL POTENTIAL DEFENDANTS can argue the club is out of time

Something that we havent covered here is the Limitation Act.

In a personal injury claim the limitation period is 3 years. Money or debt claims are 6 years. Aviation claims are 2 years.

That is to say any claim needs to be made within 2 years else the claim is likely to fail on time (unless the court grants a section 33 waiver)

It does sound as though this claim has only recently been made.

If this is the case ALL POTENTIAL DEFENDANTS can argue the club is out of time

Exactly Paul.

Lets say you own a debt to Sky then Sky have 6 years to take you to court.

I'm not sure what this claims limit is but it must be getting close to nit being Enforceable.

I am pretty sure aviation claims is two years

So, if I was a defendant solicitor, I would be arguing that legal proceedings needed to be made no later than 2021

I am pretty sure aviation claims is two years

So, if I was a defendant solicitor, I would be arguing that legal proceedings needed to be made no later than 2021

Well yes if it comes under aviation law but there are always loopholes to use. Most likely Tan has been advised by the these loopholes by his "Brief".

I am pretty sure aviation claims is two years

So, if I was a defendant solicitor, I would be arguing that legal proceedings needed to be made no later than 2021

Paul would that be just a continuous follow on as the case was live?