We have a top planning Lawyer working with us and we will be advised by him.

In my opinion our route is to the High Court rather than the Ombudsman if the Council don't resolve this but as I say we will be advised by our Lawyer.

Just like Sept Blatter , Boxes chickens will come home to roost , they always do

Looks a bit like a dogs dinner. Those not telling the truth will be found out as one lie leads to another to cover the previous one.

Would that be a BOXer dog ??????

I'll get my coat.............

Any plans for a mass demonstration against the Council outside the town hall during a council sitting??

No plans for any mass show of support - at this time!

See our 'esteemed leader' has just been on Look North. Had to turn the sound down and seethe in silence.

Could we be right in assuming sandal cat,that if we went down the high court route, that this might jolt the council into back tracking and sorting their mess out before the lawyers bills started dropping on boxes table? .. Providing there is a water tight case..

Watched it my self WT,could've kicked the Telly round the the room,the lying,weasel faced piece of,any way the Telly survived,just.

Same here BL'sM. There could have been a big pile of broken telly's down at Denby Dale Road tip tomorrow morning.

John Foster

Quite often once legal proceedings are instigated it can indeed jolt the other party into settling before the matter gets to the High Court. However you need to have the cash to commence the proceedings and be prepared to take your case all the way.

No Lawyer will ever tell you that you have a watertight case and there is always a risk that however much you are confident of your case the Judge may not see it your way.

The problem is the cost of instigating proceedings. The Stadium Trust will need to raise a substantial amount of money but the Council will just use the Council Taxpayers money to fund a defence. The Supporters Trust has investigated and found a crowdfunding web site who will allow us to raise money to fund such a legal challenge if it comes to it.

No one wants to take this to the High Court, we want to see the Council enforce the Section 106 Agreement/UU and the Developer to deliver what they promised the citizens of Wakefield at the Public Inquiry, however if they are not prepared to deliver on that promise we are prepared to take the matter to the High Court by way of a Judicial Review.

When JFK came to power, the CIA noted that things just didn't get done as JFK and those after him started to employ lawyers rather than military men as advisers. If told to do something, a military person would work out how to do it, whereas a lawyer would merely work out a way to weasel out of it. By the way, I'm a lawyer.

From Sandal's earlier post, reading it as a lawyer, I'm assuming the problem is that the council won't stump up the 2 million. Yorkcourt can say that the unilateral undertaking is dependent on the council paying 2 million. The phrase "unilateral undertaking" means a promise by one party acting alone. So I'm guessing that the council are saying that they are not obligated to pay anything as they haven't undertaken to pay anything.

So there is an impasse, a stalemate, the council refusing to pay 2 million, and Yorkcourt saying that was the precondition as part of the undertaking.

Assuming I've read it right.

My take the council don't want to enforce Yorkcourt to do anything as WMDC are complicit with the whole front of using the stadium/community facilities to deliver Newcold. I have my own theory why certain public servants don't want to delve into the shady dealings and it doesn't smell great. I cant think of any other reason as to their reluctance to due their duty and the trotting out the faux legal advice claim.

I hope TRB, IA, Sandal Cat can be the catalysts that bring this rotten borough council down.

Are we going down the wrong avenue like i posted on FB Try to informed the S.O.S. of what is going on ie email every MP as possible the rough details what this council are trying to get out of and the link to BOX'S council meeting speech where he lies about the 106 agreement and also the Press every national newspaper lets make this national news name and shame them what have we got to lose lets get some pressure put on them.

You've just saved me from having to write the same post!

I can't see any legitimate reason why the Council wouldn't want to enforce the S106!

The statements from Box just make me think he's desperate to strangle this at birth, his aledged threat of legal action against the Trust makes me very suspicious of what they're desperately trying to hide.
"He doth protest too much meethinks"

I can (albeit you can question the legitimacy of it): they don't want to hand over two million quid.

I was trying to think of an analogy to explain the difference between a unilateral undertaking and an agreement, and this is the best I can come up with.

If I come to an agreement with Michael Carter that I will drive him to the Magic weekend for £200 and he isn't at the pre-arranged meeting spot, he owes me £200. We had an agreement, I have consideration for the agreement by driving to the meeting spot, and I am £200 down.

If, however, I give him a unilateral undertaking that if he is at the pre-arranged meeting spot, I will drive him to the Magic weekend for £200, he owes me nothing if he isn't there and hopped on the team bus. I have promised to do something if he does something in return, but he isn't bound by it. He could turn round and say that he wanted to save £200.

Applying my reasoning to what I presume is the case, Yorkcourt aren't bound by the undertaking until the Council cough up two million, and I'm presuming the Council have decided they don't want to spend the money. That allows Yorkcourt the get-out.

Except there is a S106 in place!

S106? You're having a laugh if you think these cut any ice these days. They're widely unenforced and disregarded by councils throughout Britain, not just yours. In many cases they were included as conditions merely to give councils the wriggle room they needed to let various contentious developments to proceed. Nowadays councils simply don't have the resources or the desire to police them all - in fact it's unlikely they ever did.

That only binds Yorkcourt if the council hand over £2 million. The planning obligation is triggered by the council handing over the money. If the council choose not to hand it over, Yorkcourt aren't bound. Yorkcourt can hardly be bound to do something by the planning authority when that obligation is only triggered when that planning authority does something too.

I may be wrong, because I am going on what I read on here, but the sequence is surely this:
1. Yorkcourt sells so many leases, thus triggering their obligations under the unilateral undertaking they freely gave.
2. Yorkcourt say to the council, 'we've done our bit, we are bound by that undertaking, but of course our undertaking was on the proviso that you'd also stump up two million quid. Here are our bank details.'
3. The council say, 'what, you want two million quid? Where's it say that?'
4. 'There, in our undertaking. We've agreed to stump up the cash when you do. We're ready. Cash please.'
5. Council say, 'We're not bound by that undertaking. It's unilateral, by you alone, doesn't bind us. No cash. Soz.'
6. Yorkcourt say, 'Looks like no new stadium then, because our undertaking was conditional.'
7. Council say, 'Lolz. Never mind. Hey, at least Cas get a new stadium. Some mug here decided to bind the council with a two-way agreement so that there was no way round it. PMSL.'
8. Peter Box strolls past the room in a a Cas shirt, whistling contentedly.

Or something.

Sounds about right does that Slugger to me. The only bit I cannot see is where the council are going to magic 2 million quid from though.

It's not my understanding that the S106 is triggered by the £2M payment that's a summation you've made from what you know.

It's always been portrayed that the S106 was in force from day 1 and needed enforcing by the WMDC. The 60,000m2 clause was the trigger for the funding of the stadium to be released along with the £2M from the council.

Out of interest, I know £2m was initially promised to the Cas stadium. Is this still the case?

AFAIK - it was promised for the Glasshoughton project (Waystone) but nothing for the new one (Lateral). The 5 Towns Stadium funding plan doesn't rely on government funding.

HuddsTiger gives a good explanation of the complications here on Casforum:- www.casforum.co.uk/forum/viewtop ... 6&start=45

HuddsTiger gives a good explanation of the complications here on Casforum:- www.casforum.co.uk/forum/viewtop ... 6&start=45