Member Info for erazzel

Guess ill be reported - boo hoo

If any one on here has to moan and believe they have been snubbed then that's your right, but stop for a moment, and go back to work an stop wasting time on here with your bile.

One has to wonder how interlocked Governments are behind the scenes

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-georgia-wine-imports-protests-alcohol-trade-imports-a8972386.html

Sssssssssssssssssssnake

If you had sued someone then you would ultimately have won or lost.

Starrage should have said that he made a claim, not sued.

Big difference obviously.

The guy is a complete snake

That is impressive thinking.

random.....

Court practice
On 13 September 2019, the Supreme Court of
Georgia issued clarifications regarding the
excuses for the failure to appear in court.
The counsel for the appellant submitted an
application to the court, requesting
postponement of the hearing scheduled in the
Court of Appeals. The application state that the
counsel and the appellant were unable to
participate in the hearing for the reasons that
the counsel had to attend a training course and
the client had fallen sick.
The Court of Appeals ruled that the application
failed to provide a sufficient substantiation. As a
result, the application was dismissed at the
motion of the opposing party.
The Supreme Court of Georgia referred to the
Civil Procedure Code which establishes the
reasons for non-appearance at court, including
illness, death of a close relative, or forcemajeure.
The Supreme Court held that the Court of
Appeals was duly notified of the non-appearance
of the counsel and the appellant and the
application provided the relevant excuses. The
Supreme Court further found that the scheduling
of a hearing for a time when both the counsel
and the appellant were unable to appear at court
violated the appellant’s right to participate in
hearing. Thus, the Supreme Court resolved that
the appeal was dismissed unlawfully.

Never known a drill and set up needed to be more than 0.3km for a campaign....

Just Saying, point of extraction ya'know.....

Oh Well (Well indeed)

Starrage is no fool. Given

You should ask yourself why he has posted such a specific post....

Bugs-by

• The period of temporary use cannot exceed
the term of the licence;

THERE IT IS. WELL BLOODY FOUND

Has he got shares?

Has he sold them?

So he may not be working there, but does he have shares?

Pieces of the puzzle

Pinch*

Do you mean ouch your nose whilst speaking on Z phone?

This is going to drag on for years

Hey presto - finally some speaks sense.

All costs with be the burden to the company being liquidated.

So, lawyers etc not being paid is pretty obvious why! This will the liquidators decision to pay if they can!

Agreed. What they get in the £ is exactly that.

If the only seizure and liquidation process is related to FRCC and partly FRGC only then unfortunately Hope has an empty box and that is to this end.

I reckon FRGC is a big up yours to outrider and SH whilst the legals bills are embedded there too.

Doesn't matter about the transfer shift.

All liquidators need to do is get NAV in the £ as to speak.

Its either game over according to the premature dark side, or quite simply a wrestle in the sandpits just for time.

I should think the way SN & ZM see it is that the bills are the liability of FRCC and not FRR.

End.