Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ca

News of the World article about us tomorrow

Recommended Posts

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]

A mistake.

Will the NOTW appologise? YES
Will we get compo?  Not a chance
[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Herman "][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Big Bad John"]Where on earth did they get the "£8 Million" figure from? It has been very well documented to of been far closer to £11 Million.

[/quote]

Lets see you produce the evidence thats its £11m (and dont rely on a quote from Archant).

[/quote]

I think that was the amount she mentioned to Simon Mayo,[Y] just before Christmas.I will try and find it on iplayer

[/quote]

Yes and we have discussed the figure................................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="canary cherub "]

Camul . . . you''ve been conspicuous by your absence on this site recently. 

If you haven''t already, go and do a bit of digging and find out where this story came from.

Otherwise we''ll assume it''s you . . . after all, R Cowling has to be a prime suspect (allegedly) [;)]

 

[/quote]

 

I''m conspicuous by my absence, dear chap, ditto the Colchester board, because I am backgrounding a news documentary for Sky which is taking up rather a lot of time.

As to the Screws story know nothing about it - we were up to our eyes in female suicide bombers (Express, Sun Tel) and child rapists let off with a caution (Mail on Sunday) and that was only Friday.  We couldn''t fit Norwich in I''m afraid.

I don''t know the reporter - I think he''s a sports casual on Friday and Saturday.  He may not have originated the story, merely asked to write it up.  He''s not a news reporter that I can say.  Someone will have filed a story to them I assume or maybe the saw the recent EDP stuff and put it away for a rainy day. 

I really don''t see you getting much money out of it.  If they admit they got it wrong they''ll offer something and pay your costs.  It could go on for weeks while the two sides negotiate a sum.  It''s a good story locally but, sadly, no one else will be interested unless Delia pops up and claims it lost her a TV show contract.

If you are going to claim that it has "damaged" the club they might well say: "Right, let''s go to to the High Court then" and risk it.  Those sort of things are normally 50-50 as to which way it goes unless you can easily prove damage and right at the moment that doesn''t look like the case at Norwich.

I would think you will make a bit of money out of it but I really can''t see it being very much.  At worst it''s a wrong story - not many dead.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mello Yello"]

Anyone seen the Dromedary Dongle? Anyone? Anyone?

Where is he? He should be giving us all his experience in these matters concerning the headlines...Does he know the reporter?

....C''mon Cameldong.....let''s have your opinion! We''re waiting!

[/quote]

C''mon Cameldong! Where are you?....I would have thought this would have been right up your street?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mello Yello"][quote user="Mello Yello"]

Anyone seen the Dromedary Dongle? Anyone? Anyone?

Where is he? He should be giving us all his experience in these matters concerning the headlines...Does he know the reporter?

....C''mon Cameldong.....let''s have your opinion! We''re waiting!

[/quote]

C''mon Cameldong! Where are you?....I would have thought this would have been right up your street?

 

[/quote]

Wahay! Here he is!.....3 minutes before I typed....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="canary cherub "]

Camul . . . you''ve been conspicuous by your absence on this site recently. 

If you haven''t already, go and do a bit of digging and find out where this story came from.

Otherwise we''ll assume it''s you . . . after all, R Cowling has to be a prime suspect (allegedly) [;)]

[/quote]

It will be intresting to read what Camal or Mick Dennis have to say about this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub

It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs.

The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC.

As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick.

The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]Priceless................ but nice to know we''ve now got a razor sharp Chief Executive who''ll make them grovel if nothing else.The NOTW can be an amusing little comic at times. Some years ago they ran a '' public interest '' story over a couple of issues regarding the alleged sexual exploits of a couple of heterosexual City players. As far as I''m aware no lasting harm was done to those involved, for, if anything, it probably upped their standing in the bed department. It would have made for a lively dressing room that''s for sure....There is a darker side to all this too. The NOTW have run '' stories '' about ordinary members of the public who allegedly engage in various similar, but more unusual, perfectly legal private practices. Sadly these exposures have, on more than one occasion, resulted in a person taking their own life as a direct result of what has been printed about them. The rich and the famous might be considered fair game. There really can be no excuse when  '' Ordinary Joe '' in the street is named which then results in such tragic outcomes.The NOTW is a grubby publication at best. Now that Mr McNally has them by the proverbials it''ll be good fun to see them squirm a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]A mistake.Will the NOTW appologise? YESWill we get compo?  Not a chance[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Look on the bright side of this TFA.  Good news for a legal firm in the local economy.

 

"To various partners being disturbed on a SUNDAY morning and for sundry discussions and legal advice proffered to Messrs Bowkett and McNally ("Our Clients") the sum of....................

"To making SPECIAL arrangements to issue a letter to News Corporation (probably fax and recorded delivery will follow but never mind the detail........") the sum of...........

"To consulting various AUTHORITIES on the law of Defamation" the sum of........

"To various disbursements" the sum of..... (i.e. you have just paid for half the cost of the purchase of the fax machine as have 172 clients before you).

Plus VAT.

Terms: Settlement within 30 days nett of the date of this invoice.  Late settlement will incur a charge of 5 per cent over Bank of England base rate in force at the expiry of 30 days. (see terms and conditions).

 

[;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Two points. Probably best not to get too excited at the possible damages, even if this goes to court and the club wins.Secondly, defamation is a very tricky branch of the law. The club''s solicitors will almost certainly have to hand this over to a specialist firm. The NotW''s lawyers will be experts in the subject; NCFC will need to hire similar. [/quote]

Agreed. To your second point Purple, newspapers are, of course, represented by experts who usually will base their defense on their client acted in a manner that was based upon good faith and reasonable belief. However, if it does go to court ( not likely ), the court will want to know that the newspaper used multiple sources to corroborate their story. From a distance this would appear to be a tricky one for the newspaper in this situation.  

[/quote]Yankee, these are VERY arcane issues and who knows what the newspaper''s defence might be. It might not be good faith and/or reasonable belief. They might say the story had been true at the time but NCFC acted to make it untrue. They might even be dumb (or desperate) enough to try the Reynolds Defence.Anyway, back to my other point, having looked at the website of the solicitors being used by NCFC to see how many defamation specialists they have the answer seems to be precisely none. Hey ho. If the NotW caves in, fine, but if this goes the course the company will have to get in experts. I can think of at least one who would probably love the case.As to damages (if any) they will NOT pay off the debt. If we were a listed company, and our shares dived when the LSE opened tomorrow, then we might be on for squillions. But we are unlisted; hard to prove much financial damage. How actually have we suffered?There is the argument of reputational damage to the directors, because the article effectively accuses them of lying,. They said officially, as directors of a PLC, that we were relatively safe, at least for this season. The article says we are going belly up very soon.What would be fun would be if it could be proved HAD mixed us up with Notts County, because that would pretty much destroy any defence, and might add to the damages on the basis of sheer incompetence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Two points. Probably best not to get too excited at the possible damages, even if this goes to court and the club wins.

Secondly, defamation is a very tricky branch of the law. The club''s solicitors will almost certainly have to hand this over to a specialist firm. The NotW''s lawyers will be experts in the subject; NCFC will need to hire similar.
[/quote]

Agreed. To your second point Purple, newspapers are, of course, represented by experts who usually will base their defense on their client acted in a manner that was based upon good faith and reasonable belief. However, if it does go to court ( not likely ), the court will want to know that the newspaper used multiple sources to corroborate their story. From a distance this would appear to be a tricky one for the newspaper in this situation.  

[/quote]

Yankee, these are VERY arcane issues and who knows what the newspaper''s defence might be. It might not be good faith and/or reasonable belief. They might say the story had been true at the time but NCFC acted to make it untrue. They might even be dumb (or desperate) enough to try the Reynolds Defence.

Anyway, back to my other point, having looked at the website of the solicitors being used by NCFC to see how many defamation specialists they have the answer seems to be precisely none. Hey ho. If the NotW caves in, fine, but if this goes the course the company will have to get in experts. I can think of at least one who would probably love the case.

As to damages (if any) they will NOT pay off the debt. If we were a listed company, and our shares dived when the LSE opened tomorrow, then we might be on for squillions. But we are unlisted; hard to prove much financial damage. How actually have we suffered?

There is the argument of reputational damage to the directors, because the article effectively accuses them of lying,. They said officially, as directors of a PLC, that we were relatively safe, at least for this season. The article says we are going belly up very soon.

What would be fun would be if it could be proved HAD mixed us up with Notts County, because that would pretty much destroy any defence, and might add to the damages on the basis of sheer incompetence.[/quote]

News Corporation get about 20/30 of these letters a week.  Unlike yourselves they don''t have to go outside "in house" to defend them - that''s why they are paid the money they are.

If you are claiming "reputational damage" my bet is that they would be quite happy to take you all the way to the High Court.

Not sure how Norwich would "prove" a mix up with Notts County if it was not admitted.  You?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was a mix up with Notts County, it''s quite a mix up as the facts are nothing like those of Notts.  They owe 1.9 million to HMRC, not 8m, it''s not 8m even with other debts taken in to account, and their court hearing is on wednesday not thursday...(fingers crossed it gets sorted for them, my Dad is a Notts fan) 

This is either the laziest journalism ever ''NCFC, hmm I dunno... Norwich, check the figures, nah'' or complete fiction based on our recent financial announcement.  Both of these are not good enough reasons and i''m glad Norwich have reacted the way they have.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Two points. Probably best not to get too excited at the possible damages, even if this goes to court and the club wins.

Secondly, defamation is a very tricky branch of the law. The club''s solicitors will almost certainly have to hand this over to a specialist firm. The NotW''s lawyers will be experts in the subject; NCFC will need to hire similar.
[/quote]

Agreed. To your second point Purple, newspapers are, of course, represented by experts who usually will base their defense on their client acted in a manner that was based upon good faith and reasonable belief. However, if it does go to court ( not likely ), the court will want to know that the newspaper used multiple sources to corroborate their story. From a distance this would appear to be a tricky one for the newspaper in this situation.  

[/quote]

Yankee, these are VERY arcane issues and who knows what the newspaper''s defence might be. It might not be good faith and/or reasonable belief. They might say the story had been true at the time but NCFC acted to make it untrue. They might even be dumb (or desperate) enough to try the Reynolds Defence.

Anyway, back to my other point, having looked at the website of the solicitors being used by NCFC to see how many defamation specialists they have the answer seems to be precisely none. Hey ho. If the NotW caves in, fine, but if this goes the course the company will have to get in experts. I can think of at least one who would probably love the case.

As to damages (if any) they will NOT pay off the debt. If we were a listed company, and our shares dived when the LSE opened tomorrow, then we might be on for squillions. But we are unlisted; hard to prove much financial damage. How actually have we suffered?

There is the argument of reputational damage to the directors, because the article effectively accuses them of lying,. They said officially, as directors of a PLC, that we were relatively safe, at least for this season. The article says we are going belly up very soon.

What would be fun would be if it could be proved HAD mixed us up with Notts County, because that would pretty much destroy any defence, and might add to the damages on the basis of sheer incompetence.[/quote]

Yes, I think we are speaking essentially from the same pulpit PC. I don''t think this will go to court and I believe that any amount of money paid to NCFC will be relatively negligible. However, the part that is always interesting in these matters are not what is necessarily in front of our eyes right now. If what prompted the NOTW to go with the story is incompetence ( e.g. it was really all about Notts County ) and there was more than just one individual involved directly employed by the newspaper contributing to the incompetence, well then, people sometimes talk for a number of reasons. We shall see how it plays out.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Two points. Probably best not to get too excited at the possible damages, even if this goes to court and the club wins.

Secondly, defamation is a very tricky branch of the law. The club''s solicitors will almost certainly have to hand this over to a specialist firm. The NotW''s lawyers will be experts in the subject; NCFC will need to hire similar.
[/quote]

Agreed. To your second point Purple, newspapers are, of course, represented by experts who usually will base their defense on their client acted in a manner that was based upon good faith and reasonable belief. However, if it does go to court ( not likely ), the court will want to know that the newspaper used multiple sources to corroborate their story. From a distance this would appear to be a tricky one for the newspaper in this situation.  

[/quote]

Yankee, these are VERY arcane issues and who knows what the newspaper''s defence might be. It might not be good faith and/or reasonable belief. They might say the story had been true at the time but NCFC acted to make it untrue. They might even be dumb (or desperate) enough to try the Reynolds Defence.

Anyway, back to my other point, having looked at the website of the solicitors being used by NCFC to see how many defamation specialists they have the answer seems to be precisely none. Hey ho. If the NotW caves in, fine, but if this goes the course the company will have to get in experts. I can think of at least one who would probably love the case.

As to damages (if any) they will NOT pay off the debt. If we were a listed company, and our shares dived when the LSE opened tomorrow, then we might be on for squillions. But we are unlisted; hard to prove much financial damage. How actually have we suffered?

There is the argument of reputational damage to the directors, because the article effectively accuses them of lying,. They said officially, as directors of a PLC, that we were relatively safe, at least for this season. The article says we are going belly up very soon.

What would be fun would be if it could be proved HAD mixed us up with Notts County, because that would pretty much destroy any defence, and might add to the damages on the basis of sheer incompetence.[/quote]

Yes, I think we are speaking essentially from the same pulpit PC. I don''t think this will go to court and I believe that any amount of money paid to NCFC will be relatively negligible. However, the part that is always interesting in these matters are not what is necessarily in front of our eyes right now. If what prompted the NOTW to go with the story is incompetence ( e.g. it was really all about Notts County ) and there was more than just one individual involved directly employed by the newspaper contributing to the incompetence, well then, people sometimes talk for a number of reasons. We shall see how it plays out.  

[/quote]

"is"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bottom line. The Club can be seen to be standing up for itself but don''t let it become a drama serial and a distraction. That is for the Cowlings of this world.

I cannot see much monetary value in this so let''s jest show a bit of class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]A mistake.Will the NOTW appologise? YESWill we get compo?  Not a chance[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc[/quote]Intent doesn''t really matter, would just have to prove that they have been ''reckless'' rather than have direct intention. It''s unprofessional and in my opinion quite reckless. I can''t see there being a big sum involved but i must say i''m very impressed with McNally....would the Norwich ''of old'' simply have been Doomcaster mumbling on radio norfolk "They got it wrong, they said sorry, they''ve got executive seats in the jarrold for the next game, lovely man that journo"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]A mistake.Will the NOTW appologise? YESWill we get compo?  Not a chance[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc[/quote]Intent doesn''t really matter, would just have to prove that they have been ''reckless'' rather than have direct intention. It''s unprofessional and in my opinion quite reckless. I can''t see there being a big sum involved but i must say i''m very impressed with McNally....would the Norwich ''of old'' simply have been Doomcaster mumbling on radio norfolk "They got it wrong, they said sorry, they''ve got executive seats in the jarrold for the next game, lovely man that journo"...[/quote]I''m not knocking the way we reacted by any stretch, plus generally the NOTW is no more than comic.  I just don''t think we''ll get compo, other than a few quid to cover the letter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]

A mistake.

Will the NOTW appologise? YES
Will we get compo?  Not a chance
[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]

My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc
[/quote]

Intent doesn''t really matter, would just have to prove that they have been ''reckless'' rather than have direct intention. It''s unprofessional and in my opinion quite reckless. I can''t see there being a big sum involved but i must say i''m very impressed with McNally....would the Norwich ''of old'' simply have been Doomcaster mumbling on radio norfolk "They got it wrong, they said sorry, they''ve got executive seats in the jarrold for the next game, lovely man that journo"...
[/quote]

You obviously don''t know much about the law of libel and slander (no reason why you should).  Intent does matter.  It leads to "aggravated damages". And terribly difficult to prove. 

You need to get out more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]

A mistake.

Will the NOTW appologise? YES
Will we get compo?  Not a chance
[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]

My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc
[/quote]

Intent doesn''t really matter, would just have to prove that they have been ''reckless'' rather than have direct intention. It''s unprofessional and in my opinion quite reckless. I can''t see there being a big sum involved but i must say i''m very impressed with McNally....would the Norwich ''of old'' simply have been Doomcaster mumbling on radio norfolk "They got it wrong, they said sorry, they''ve got executive seats in the jarrold for the next game, lovely man that journo"...
[/quote]

 

The fact is that rumours caused by the News of the World can damage the club. Businesses may not give credit in future and may actually start to call for some loans to be repaid if they fear that there is any chance that they may not be repaid in full if the club was to go into administration. There may be fairly substantial damages if Norwich can prove that their credit-rating for instance or cash-flow has been substantially damaged by negligence of this newspaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="hogesar"][quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]A mistake.Will the NOTW appologise? YESWill we get compo?  Not a chance[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc[/quote]Intent doesn''t really matter, would just have to prove that they have been ''reckless'' rather than have direct intention. It''s unprofessional and in my opinion quite reckless. I can''t see there being a big sum involved but i must say i''m very impressed with McNally....would the Norwich ''of old'' simply have been Doomcaster mumbling on radio norfolk "They got it wrong, they said sorry, they''ve got executive seats in the jarrold for the next game, lovely man that journo"...[/quote]

 

The fact is that rumours caused by the News of the World can damage the club. Businesses may not give credit in future and may actually start to call for some loans to be repaid if they fear that there is any chance that they may not be repaid in full if the club was to go into administration. There may be fairly substantial damages if Norwich can prove that their credit-rating for instance or cash-flow has been substantially damaged by negligence of this newspaper.

[/quote]If there''s a consensus the NOTW writes ballcocks and rumours are just rumours. Why would creditors refuse credit just on that?  Plus if City refuted the claims and demanded a retraction of the story (which was taken down on line) the same day, how could that damage the credit rating?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="paul moy"][quote user="hogesar"][quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="The Pig Will Eat You"][quote user="Metatron"]Canary Cherub It''s obvious where the journo got his story from - he mixed up his NCFCs. The facts of the story (admin on Thursday, £8m debt) all belong to Notts County FC. As someone pointed out on page 3 or 4 of this thread it sounds like the paper made a note in the diary to say "NCFC - court hearing this week" and the journo got the wrong end of the stick. The fact that no-one CHECKED the story before publication, however, is another matter.[/quote]

A mistake.

Will the NOTW appologise? YES
Will we get compo?  Not a chance
[/quote]

What is the basis and what are your authorities for this legal opinion?

 

[/quote]

My opinion obviously, based on the probability it was a mistake due to a mix up with Notts County.  And it was not done with the intent to cause distress etc etc
[/quote]

Intent doesn''t really matter, would just have to prove that they have been ''reckless'' rather than have direct intention. It''s unprofessional and in my opinion quite reckless. I can''t see there being a big sum involved but i must say i''m very impressed with McNally....would the Norwich ''of old'' simply have been Doomcaster mumbling on radio norfolk "They got it wrong, they said sorry, they''ve got executive seats in the jarrold for the next game, lovely man that journo"...
[/quote]

 

The fact is that rumours caused by the News of the World can damage the club. Businesses may not give credit in future and may actually start to call for some loans to be repaid if they fear that there is any chance that they may not be repaid in full if the club was to go into administration. There may be fairly substantial damages if Norwich can prove that their credit-rating for instance or cash-flow has been substantially damaged by negligence of this newspaper.

[/quote]

If there''s a consensus the NOTW writes ballcocks and rumours are just rumours. Why would creditors refuse credit just on that?  Plus if City refuted the claims and demanded a retraction of the story (which was taken down on line) the same day, how could that damage the credit rating?
[/quote]

... because some businesses on hearing a rumour may believe that there is no smoke without fire, and even if rumours are refuted could still continue to refuse to do business on a credit-basis, especially at this time of recession where every penny counts.  Obviously though, knocking the story on the head ASAP with maximum publicity should in the eyes of the courts mitigate the damage done and thus reduce any potential damages awarded.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"If this was a mix up with Notts County, it''s quite a mix up as the facts are nothing like those of Notts. They owe 1.9 million to HMRC, not 8m, it''s not 8m even with other debts taken in to account,"

Apologies...yes, the Notts County bill to HMRC is not £8m. I was talking about their total debt but after reading the article again I can see that the £8m is what they say Delia has put into Norwich City over the years.

"and their court hearing is on wednesday not thursday..."

Correct, which means they could be in admin "by Thursday" as the NOTW piece said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Two points. Probably best not to get too excited at the possible damages, even if this goes to court and the club wins.Secondly, defamation is a very tricky branch of the law. The club''s solicitors will almost certainly have to hand this over to a specialist firm. The NotW''s lawyers will be experts in the subject; NCFC will need to hire similar. [/quote]

Agreed. To your second point Purple, newspapers are, of course, represented by experts who usually will base their defense on their client acted in a manner that was based upon good faith and reasonable belief. However, if it does go to court ( not likely ), the court will want to know that the newspaper used multiple sources to corroborate their story. From a distance this would appear to be a tricky one for the newspaper in this situation.  

[/quote]Yankee, these are VERY arcane issues and who knows what the newspaper''s defence might be. It might not be good faith and/or reasonable belief. They might say the story had been true at the time but NCFC acted to make it untrue. They might even be dumb (or desperate) enough to try the Reynolds Defence.Anyway, back to my other point, having looked at the website of the solicitors being used by NCFC to see how many defamation specialists they have the answer seems to be precisely none. Hey ho. If the NotW caves in, fine, but if this goes the course the company will have to get in experts. I can think of at least one who would probably love the case.As to damages (if any) they will NOT pay off the debt. If we were a listed company, and our shares dived when the LSE opened tomorrow, then we might be on for squillions. But we are unlisted; hard to prove much financial damage. How actually have we suffered?There is the argument of reputational damage to the directors, because the article effectively accuses them of lying,. They said officially, as directors of a PLC, that we were relatively safe, at least for this season. The article says we are going belly up very soon.What would be fun would be if it could be proved HAD mixed us up with Notts County, because that would pretty much destroy any defence, and might add to the damages on the basis of sheer incompetence.[/quote]

News Corporation get about 20/30 of these letters a week.  Unlike yourselves they don''t have to go outside "in house" to defend them - that''s why they are paid the money they are.

If you are claiming "reputational damage" my bet is that they would be quite happy to take you all the way to the High Court.

Not sure how Norwich would "prove" a mix up with Notts County if it was not admitted.  You?

[/quote]Funnily enough, Cam, I was aware of that stuff, which is probably why none of it cuts actually across anything I have said, which has been to downplay fans'' expectations about damages - if any. As I said before, how actually have we suffered?My point all along has been precisely that the NotW deals with this kind of complaint (and much more high-powered than this) all the time. That is why, IF it comes to a fight, NCFC will need to dump its Norwich solicitors and hire experts in the field.As to the Notts County angle, I didn''t say it could possibly be proved that there had been a mix-up with them. I have no idea even if there was. All I said was it would almost certainly have a bearing on the outcome IF it could be proved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...