pellegrini

[carl_feedthegoat]

no easier to enforce than a verbal agreement and ergo not worth the paper its written on.

i think you meant to say oral. verbal can mean oral or written. oh, and many oral contracts are enforceable...

Without witnesses Oral contracts are worthless.

false.

Your talking shite....Im talking from experience.Try proving to a court that the evidence is on your side , you would have to be a mumbling idiot to fuck up a court case against you that was based on a conversation.

[Sideshow Bob]

no easier to enforce than a verbal agreement and ergo not worth the paper its written on.

i think you meant to say oral. verbal can mean oral or written. oh, and many oral contracts are enforceable...

Without witnesses Oral contracts are worthless.

false.

Your talking shite....Im talking from experience.Try proving to a court that the evidence is on your side , you would have to be a mumbling idiot to fuck up a court case against you that was based on a conversation.

suffice it to say that you're wrong. there are numerous ways - other than witnesses - to prove the existence of an oral agreement. course of dealing, admission, etc.

[Beefymcfc]

At present Mr P still has a contract with Malaga until the end of next season and it has only been mooted that they have agreed a buy-out clause of €4 mil to let him go after this weekends game.

Once the game is over and any disagreements ironed out then I think he'll be signing soon after. It's all down to settling the bill, in my opinion.

[carl_feedthegoat]

Ill add to the above ,"you would have to be a mumbling idiot with a dodgy background to fuck up a court case against you that was based on a conversation without witnesses"

I have won cases....a fair few over the years and most of them never even got to court, UNLESS the complainee has STRONG evidence against you then they will NEVER win the case.

[CTID Hants]

I think it is down to being respectful to Malaga. He's not finished there yet It will all be sorted soon - I hope!

They are away to Barca Saturday evening, he'll be back in Malaga no later than Sunday morning.

There is a Jet2 flight from AGP at 11:40 landing at Ringway 13:50.

John68 is booked to pick him up from Term 1 & take him to meet Txiki and crew who will leisurely sign contracts over a nice Rioja reserva whilst Isco is given his medical.

The presser will be called for 19:00hrs (especially to piss off the hacks who thought they'd done for the weekend) to announce the coup d'état before heading to Evuna's on Deansgate for some cheeky Tapas.

Porque eso es cómo nos rodillo ;-)

[MilnersJaw]

Oral contracts can buy you a lot of favour with the right crowd.

[Alex Sapphire]

he's bound by his contract until it ends. malaga's agreement to release him is the thing that's future dated.
It is illegal to interfere with a contract between two parties, so we have actually overstepped the mark if we have a verbal agreement, so yes he should have kept schtum

Where did you study law then? Are you suggesting that it's illegal to seek another job while already employed or that it's illegal to seek to employ somebody already employed by someone else? I'm sorry but I've got to contest that view because it's a total misconception and a ridiculous slur on the integrity of our owners who will, I believe, conduct their affairs with due diligence ensuring the very best of legal advice.

Please understand that we have not interfered with a contract between two parties because it's not illegal to vie for trade so we have not overstepped the mark if we have a verbal agreement.
If we had signed up to a written agreement that interfered with an existing agreement (a contract that comes into effect before his existing contract ends) then Pellegrini himself may have been in breach of his contract (as there's likely a clause to the effect that he can't enter into contract with another party while bound by his existing contract) but not us as we are not party to his agreement and, regardless, that isn't the case.

I also hold the view that we could be signed up to a written memorandum of understanding / letter of intent that takes us into contract subject to his existing contract being terminated - that would be a written agreement alongside his current but equally not illegal as it's 'effect' would be consecutive not concurrent. That could happen but rarely does because case law suggests that an agreement to agree is probably no easier to enforce than a verbal agreement and ergo not worth the paper its written on.

to your first point, he would certainly be in breach but it would be also wrongful (tortious) interference if we knew of the existence of a contract, were not a party to it and incited a breach.

to your second, he said he had a verbal agreement not a MOU or LOI

to your last an Oral agreement is absolutely enforceable

[CTID Hants]

Jesus you three, please can you trundle off here ;-)

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/for ... amp-Issues ;-)

[Nigels Tackle]

Jesus you three, please can you trundle off here ;-)

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/for ... amp-Issues ;-)

or here if you want to continue the oral debate

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/foru ... .php?f=281

EDIT : NSFW!!!!

[Im_Spartacus]

or here if you want to continue the oral debate

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/foru ... .php?f=281

My Saudi thought filter wont let me go to that link, which probably means its fun no?

[ant london]

he's bound by his contract until it ends. malaga's agreement to release him is the thing that's future dated.
It is illegal to interfere with a contract between two parties, so we have actually overstepped the mark if we have a verbal agreement, so yes he should have kept schtum

Where did you study law then? Are you suggesting that it's illegal to seek another job while already employed or that it's illegal to seek to employ somebody already employed by someone else? I'm sorry but I've got to contest that view because it's a total misconception and a ridiculous slur on the integrity of our owners who will, I believe, conduct their affairs with due diligence ensuring the very best of legal advice.

Please understand that we have not interfered with a contract between two parties because it's not illegal to vie for trade so we have not overstepped the mark if we have a verbal agreement.
If we had signed up to a written agreement that interfered with an existing agreement (a contract that comes into effect before his existing contract ends) then Pellegrini himself may have been in breach of his contract (as there's likely a clause to the effect that he can't enter into contract with another party while bound by his existing contract) but not us as we are not party to his agreement and, regardless, that isn't the case.

I also hold the view that we could be signed up to a written memorandum of understanding / letter of intent that takes us into contract subject to his existing contract being terminated - that would be a written agreement alongside his current but equally not illegal as it's 'effect' would be consecutive not concurrent. That could happen but rarely does because case law suggests that an agreement to agree is probably no easier to enforce than a verbal agreement and ergo not worth the paper its written on.

obiter spastica

[Herb]

to your first response; it simply wouldn't be because you can't be bound to another man's terms. Think about it (doh).

to your second response; I was simply making the point that an advance agreement would be quite legal even if in writing - and you've missed that point.

to your last response; theoretically yes (if made on live television perhaps) but in practice no - so don't be silly.

[Herb]

Oh, and ant, go fuck yourself.

[Sideshow Bob]

to your first response; it simply wouldn't be because you can't be bound to another man's terms. Think about it (doh).

to your second response; I was simply making the point that an advance agreement would be quite legal even if in writing - and you've missed that point.

to your last response; theoretically yes (if made on live television perhaps) but in practice no - so don't be silly.

you should have quit while you were behind. this has only made you look worse.

[ant london]

Oh, and ant, go fuck yourself.

haha that was a lovely blending of two topics into a fantastic pun

humourless cunt ;-D

[Herb]

Oh, and ant, go fuck yourself.

haha that was a lovely blending of two topics into a fantastic pun

humourless cunt ;-D

Ant, you cowardly sad arsehole of a no-nothing keyboard warrier. I'm not going to get caught up in one of your childish word wars (seen you made to look silly so often that there's no sport in it). So just pm me when you've grown a set as I'm still waiting for you to pm me so that we can sort out your tampax problem.

[Herb]

Oh, and for good measure. ant, go fuck yourself.

Ha ha ha - you do make me chuckle.

[ant london]

Oh, and for good measure. ant, go fuck yourself.

Haha you silly cunt! Brilliant

[carl_feedthegoat]

Oh, and ant, go fuck yourself.

haha that was a lovely blending of two topics into a fantastic pun

humourless cunt ;-D

Ant, you cowardly sad arsehole of a no-nothing keyboard warrier. I'm not going to get caught up in one of your childish word wars (seen you made to look silly so often that there's no sport in it). So just pm me when you've grown a set as I'm still waiting for you to pm me so that we can sort out your tampax problem.

Is this a contract?

[Dwaring]

I still think we're getting mourinho.