Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2016 13:50:31 GMT 1
Let's see indeed. You're wrong on here with a great regularity, this will be no different Chelsea pay multi Million to Dr Carneiro........... Err I think I was right and you were wrong Mr Jamo........
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Jun 8, 2016 16:46:16 GMT 1
Constructive dismissal ,open and shut case Nonsense. Case closed. Jamo's actually right even if only by default. Constructive dismissal not proved due to case not reaching court due to Chelsea settleing out of court. Case closed without verdict. Chelsea settled out of court to avoid further bad publicity but no one know for sure what would have happened. Any settlement is merely guess work on behalf of the media.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2016 17:08:07 GMT 1
Jamo's actually right even if only by default. Constructive dismissal not proved due to case not reaching court due to Chelsea settleing out of court. Case closed without verdict. Chelsea settled out of court to avoid further bad publicity but no one know for sure what would have happened. Any settlement is merely guess work on behalf of the media. Actually Davycrockett, it did go to court with Mourinho present and was settled out of court during the tribunal!
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Jun 8, 2016 17:10:35 GMT 1
Jamo's actually right even if only by default. Constructive dismissal not proved due to case not reaching court due to Chelsea settleing out of court. Case closed without verdict. Chelsea settled out of court to avoid further bad publicity but no one know for sure what would have happened. Any settlement is merely guess work on behalf of the media. Actually Davycrockett, it did go to court with Mourinho present and was settled out of court afterwards! I'd betetr read up settled out of court usually means the cout case didn't complete, what was the court verdict?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2016 17:13:28 GMT 1
Actually Davycrockett, it did go to court with Mourinho present and was settled out of court afterwards! I'd betetr read up settled out of court usually means the cout case didn't complete, what was the court verdict? link
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Jun 8, 2016 17:49:19 GMT 1
Let's see indeed. You're wrong on here with a great regularity, this will be no different Chelsea pay multi Million to Dr Carneiro........... Err I think I was right and you were wrong Mr Jamo........ No you weren't. This was always going to be settled out of court if only to tie the respective parties into confidentiality clauses. your statement was " constructive dismissal, open and shut case ' . It wasn't, nor does the conclusion contend that it was. As as I said previously. You are wrong on here with great regularity so this comes as no great surprise.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jun 8, 2016 18:01:31 GMT 1
lets face it jose would have said far worse had the doctor been a male and had the doctor been male he wouldn't have gone on the pitch football is a mans game....... and i'm not sexist, hazard would have been better off in a womens team this season ;-)
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Jun 8, 2016 18:58:43 GMT 1
I'd betetr read up settled out of court usually means the cout case didn't complete, what was the court verdict? linkAh thanks for proving my point, it never actually got to court so no constructive dismissal proved just Chelsea dont want to wash their dirty laundry in public A 10-day hearing was set to be heard over seven to 10 days until June 24, but all parties involved have now agreed to draw a line under the incident after agreeing an out of court compensation package.
|
|
|
Post by claphamshrew on Jun 8, 2016 20:10:57 GMT 1
Ah thanks for proving my point, it never actually got to court so no constructive dismissal proved just Chelsea dont want to wash their dirty laundry in public A 10-day hearing was set to be heard over seven to 10 days until June 24, but all parties involved have now agreed to draw a line under the incident after agreeing an out of court compensation package. Spot on - using the Daily Mirror as a source is embarrassing enough let alone neglecting to read the full article. Wouldn't mind betting Caneiro was worried about the evidence against her, as her lawyers would have seen the skeleton argument against her, and was advised that it was better to settle. If she only got constructive dismissal I heard she would have only have had an £80k payout. If sexual harassment couldn't be proved she'd have been left with egg on her face and an empty(ish) wallet. Better settle out of court for more money as Chelsea would rather less bad publicity and less risk by paying out and closing the case, irrespective of what the actual outcome would have been. Obviously this is purely summising and is nothing more than a subjective take on the matter as I (and none of us) know the full story before FIHS or his right hand man chip in saying I'm wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2016 20:21:46 GMT 1
Chelsea pay multi Million to Dr Carneiro........... Err I think I was right and you were wrong Mr Jamo........ No you weren't. This was always going to be settled out of court if only to tie the respective parties into confidentiality clauses. your statement was " constructive dismissal, open and shut case ' . It wasn't, nor does the conclusion contend that it was. As as I said previously. You are wrong on here with great regularity so this comes as no great surprise. You do talk some bollox at times. Chelsea would not have settled out of court if they felt they would win - Fact
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Jun 8, 2016 20:34:52 GMT 1
No you weren't. This was always going to be settled out of court if only to tie the respective parties into confidentiality clauses. your statement was " constructive dismissal, open and shut case ' . It wasn't, nor does the conclusion contend that it was. As as I said previously. You are wrong on here with great regularity so this comes as no great surprise. You do talk some bollox at times. Chelsea would not have settled out of court if they felt they would win - Fact Perhaps I do talk b******s. You on the other hand take naivety to a different level if you think for one single minute constructive dismissal was the end game of Ms Caniero ( and her legal team) You made a stupid comment that was completely wrong at the time and has now been proven to be the case. Sometimes we all do it, get over it . Dont come on here gloating about a perceived victory that makes your original comment all the more ridiculous although to fair it is supported by many of your previous contributions.
|
|
|
Post by lenny on Jun 8, 2016 23:18:16 GMT 1
No you weren't. This was always going to be settled out of court if only to tie the respective parties into confidentiality clauses. your statement was " constructive dismissal, open and shut case ' . It wasn't, nor does the conclusion contend that it was. As as I said previously. You are wrong on here with great regularity so this comes as no great surprise. You do talk some bollox at times. Chelsea would not have settled out of court if they felt they would win - Fact No, Rafa, that's an opinion. One many people don't share, especially bearing in mind how wealthy Chelsea are and how comparatively small a 7 figure payout (which is purely speculation) is for their owner.
|
|
|
Post by Stavvy on Jun 9, 2016 8:07:50 GMT 1
I glad the Eva Carneiro got the pay out she deserved. At the end of the day she was only doing her job, and after being called on by the Referee she was doing exactly what should have been expected of her. It's not as though she just ran onto the pitch, she was called on. It was mentioned briefly earlier in the thread, but the person who does appear to have got away without any punishment is Hazard. He was blatantly feigning injury to waste time, yet not a lot seems to have been mentioned about this. If he hadn't technically cheated, none of this would have happened in the first place. Retrospective punishments have now come in for things like off the ball incidents Refs miss. Perhaps it should be brought in for this sort of cheating.
|
|