All Solomona talk here.
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Is the meeting today?
-
- League One Player
- Posts: 4033
- Joined: 12 Jun 2012, 22:26
- Location: NORMANTON-BUT CLOSER TO CAS THAN WAKEY BAD LANDS
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
some one said its friday 21st @11-30 both legal teams meettallguyx wrote:Is the meeting today?
- Flat Capper
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 00:10
- Location: Where ever I lay my fat
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Will we reach 150 posts before it's finalised?
Spreading the Cas gene pool
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Discussions have apparently taken place yesterday and today, and there should be an announcement by the end of the week.
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Right now I'd take 250k.nottinghamtiger wrote:Discussions have apparently taken place yesterday and today, and there should be an announcement by the end of the week.
Buy zak for 100 and get mcgilvary in. Or strengthen elsewhere.
Get it sorted 1nce and 4all
Audacter Et Sincere
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Would rather have a prop to replace lynch.Mysterio wrote:Right now I'd take 250k.nottinghamtiger wrote:Discussions have apparently taken place yesterday and today, and there should be an announcement by the end of the week.
Buy zak for 100 and get mcgilvary in. Or strengthen elsewhere.
Get it sorted 1nce and 4all
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Shoild boost his value a bit.Danny Boy wrote:Solomona picked for England RU forthcoming tour of Argentina!
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Hear ya.TT Tiger wrote:Would rather have a prop to replace lynch.Mysterio wrote:Right now I'd take 250k.nottinghamtiger wrote:Discussions have apparently taken place yesterday and today, and there should be an announcement by the end of the week.
Buy zak for 100 and get mcgilvary in. Or strengthen elsewhere.
Get it sorted 1nce and 4all
Prop and outside back.
Priorities for this/next season.
Mcgilvary and a championship player I know we're looking at.
Audacter Et Sincere
- Max n paddy
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1290
- Joined: 08 Aug 2011, 20:53
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Be interesting how this all turns out.
Ding Dang Doo, Let the tiger see the rhino !!
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Bit quiet but last week rumours were of an outcome now it seems nothing I was under the impression of that we had till the 18th to discuss the issue and find an outcome if not we would go continue court proceedings after the 18th has anyone got any better ideas?
-
Matt Verified
- Super League Player
- Posts: 13936
- Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 17:42
- Twitter: @invmatt
- Location: Leeds
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Probably struggling to count past one, all those numbers on the cheque confuses them.betts21 wrote:Bit quiet but last week rumours were of an outcome now it seems nothing I was under the impression of that we had till the 18th to discuss the issue and find an outcome if not we would go continue court proceedings after the 18th has anyone got any better ideas?
For website related issues or queries please contact the admin account as I no longer own or maintain Casforum.
Re: All Solomona talk here.
According to D.Express they are to appear in the High Court 8th May. Could it be an England International costs a L1,000,000t more!
- mart0042
- Championship Player
- Posts: 6355
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 15:06
- Location: behind the table in the lab deep under Racoon City.....
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
The breaking of a contract like his and the way its been done has so many implications for others.
Imagine being a festival owner and you hear the headliner is to play somewhere else, if they don't turn up you've got a lot of money to give back. If you plan and bring someone else in but the original band then turn up you have 2 wages to pay. That's the type of contract he's broken and aided by his manager and his new team.
The judges won't and can't allow it to happen. Contract law is very clear. The stone roses effectively stopped their career to prevent breaking their contract. A sportsman doesn't have 10 or more years ability to wait.
I hope it does go to court and we get a public victory.
Imagine being a festival owner and you hear the headliner is to play somewhere else, if they don't turn up you've got a lot of money to give back. If you plan and bring someone else in but the original band then turn up you have 2 wages to pay. That's the type of contract he's broken and aided by his manager and his new team.
The judges won't and can't allow it to happen. Contract law is very clear. The stone roses effectively stopped their career to prevent breaking their contract. A sportsman doesn't have 10 or more years ability to wait.
I hope it does go to court and we get a public victory.
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: All Solomona talk here.
The one who will get nailed here is Solomona himself.
It will be difficult to prove his agent induced him to breach his contract (unless Solomona decides to turn against his agent and lay the blame at his door, which wouldn't surprise me given his previous record of morality)
It will be difficult to prove Sale induced him to breach his contract (unless Solomona decides to turn against them, which is unlikely given they are paying his wages).
I will be easy to prove Solomona breached his contract. As far as I can see, his only hope is to play the innocent, naive, unintelligent rugby player who was misled and manipulated by Andy Clarke into thinking he was not doing anything wrong.
It will be difficult to prove his agent induced him to breach his contract (unless Solomona decides to turn against his agent and lay the blame at his door, which wouldn't surprise me given his previous record of morality)
It will be difficult to prove Sale induced him to breach his contract (unless Solomona decides to turn against them, which is unlikely given they are paying his wages).
I will be easy to prove Solomona breached his contract. As far as I can see, his only hope is to play the innocent, naive, unintelligent rugby player who was misled and manipulated by Andy Clarke into thinking he was not doing anything wrong.
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Won't this be proved at least in part by the e mail received by Steve Gill from Mr Diamond - whilst it won't prove that they twisted his arm it does prove that whilst under contract to ourselves he has been approached by Sale and most likely instigated by the agent himself.It will be difficult to prove Sale induced him to breach his contract (unless Solomona decides to turn against them, which is unlikely given they are paying his wages).
Re: All Solomona talk here.
The fact that Sale offered him a contract for more money knowing that he was under contract to Castleford for the same time period is probably proof of inducement, as established in Lumley v Gye 1853, a precedent that established a fundemental principle in the law of economic tort.
To save anyone looking it up the facts of the case are that Lumley engaged a singer on a three month contract to appear exclusively at his theatre. Gye then engaged the same singer to appear at an alternative theatre for the same period on the promise of more money. The singer cancelled the contract with Lumley and sang for Gye instead. Lumley sued for inducement of breach of contract and won. This case lays down the principle for actions in this area.
Substitute rugby player for singer and you have Sale (Gye) and Castleford (Lumley). That is our case in a nutshell it then becomes a matter of the amount of damages the court award which is where we need to establish our losses clearly and the confirmation of the offers received for Solomona become important in establishing these and getting the right amount of damages.
To save anyone looking it up the facts of the case are that Lumley engaged a singer on a three month contract to appear exclusively at his theatre. Gye then engaged the same singer to appear at an alternative theatre for the same period on the promise of more money. The singer cancelled the contract with Lumley and sang for Gye instead. Lumley sued for inducement of breach of contract and won. This case lays down the principle for actions in this area.
Substitute rugby player for singer and you have Sale (Gye) and Castleford (Lumley). That is our case in a nutshell it then becomes a matter of the amount of damages the court award which is where we need to establish our losses clearly and the confirmation of the offers received for Solomona become important in establishing these and getting the right amount of damages.
Re: All Solomona talk here.
Here's hoping Warrington and Wigan made offers over 250k, and indeed Sale at some point.Tiger53 wrote:The fact that Sale offered him a contract for more money knowing that he was under contract to Castleford for the same time period is probably proof of inducement, as established in Lumley v Gye 1853, a precedent that established a fundemental principle in the law of economic tort.
To save anyone looking it up the facts of the case are that Lumley engaged a singer on a three month contract to appear exclusively at his theatre. Gye then engaged the same singer to appear at an alternative theatre for the same period on the promise of more money. The singer cancelled the contract with Lumley and sang for Gye instead. Lumley sued for inducement of breach of contract and won. This case lays down the principle for actions in this area.
Substitute rugby player for singer and you have Sale (Gye) and Castleford (Lumley). That is our case in a nutshell it then becomes a matter of the amount of damages the court award which is where we need to establish our losses clearly and the confirmation of the offers received for Solomona become important in establishing these and getting the right amount of damages.
Thanks for the very informative post.
Audacter Et Sincere
Re: All Solomona talk here.
my only worry is that in the case above the singer hasnt swapped trades whilst solamona claims he has?Mysterio wrote:Tiger53 wrote:The fact that Sale offered him a contract for more money knowing that he was under contract to Castleford for the same time period is probably proof of inducement, as established in Lumley v Gye 1853, a precedent that established a fundemental principle in the law of economic tort.
To save anyone looking it up the facts of the case are that Lumley engaged a singer on a three month contract to appear exclusively at his theatre. Gye then engaged the same singer to appear at an alternative theatre for the same period on the promise of more money. The singer cancelled the contract with Lumley and sang for Gye instead. Lumley sued for inducement of breach of contract and won. This case lays down the principle for actions in this area.
Substitute rugby player for singer and you have Sale (Gye) and Castleford (Lumley). That is our case in a nutshell it then becomes a matter of the amount of damages the court award which is where we need to establish our losses clearly and the confirmation of the offers received for Solomona become important in establishing these and getting the right amount of damages.
Re: All Solomona talk here.
I would have thought if the original concert has been Jazz Music and the better offer had been a musical instead, the original ruling would have taken place :hand:yorky wrote:my only worry is that in the case above the singer hasnt swapped trades whilst solamona claims he has?Mysterio wrote:Tiger53 wrote:The fact that Sale offered him a contract for more money knowing that he was under contract to Castleford for the same time period is probably proof of inducement, as established in Lumley v Gye 1853, a precedent that established a fundemental principle in the law of economic tort.
To save anyone looking it up the facts of the case are that Lumley engaged a singer on a three month contract to appear exclusively at his theatre. Gye then engaged the same singer to appear at an alternative theatre for the same period on the promise of more money. The singer cancelled the contract with Lumley and sang for Gye instead. Lumley sued for inducement of breach of contract and won. This case lays down the principle for actions in this area.
Substitute rugby player for singer and you have Sale (Gye) and Castleford (Lumley). That is our case in a nutshell it then becomes a matter of the amount of damages the court award which is where we need to establish our losses clearly and the confirmation of the offers received for Solomona become important in establishing these and getting the right amount of damages.
Audacter Et Sincere
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests