A question of costs

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Readers' comments (1)

  • "But during the appeal Sumption told Weston that in order for that costs ruling to be upheld he would need to demonstrate that Leeds United was “a slippery organisation, not good for its costs”."

    The same Leeds United under the same Ken Bates that, when it went into administration, stiffed St John's Ambulance out of 99% of the amounts owed to it, and was then bought out of administration by said Ken Bates? How slippery does one have to be to satisfy Mr Sumption?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (1)