Aye and his use of was instead of were was excruciating.

I suspect that not winning was also considered, because Mr Allam would then have sued the council for serious money for the loss of FA income for his grade 2 academy.

How, though?

Would an injunction be legal if Allam has not broken the terms of the lease? If he has (which from a cursory look at the section posted by Angus Young the other week looks likely) then the Council should be able to stop them without the need for an injunction, surely?

What are the options actually open to the council if the terms of the lease have been breached?

Ask Mr Brady.

The court would only grant an injunction if Allam was in breach of the lease.

If he is in breach of the lease, how do you suggest the council stop Allam doing what he is doing without a court order?

I see. Thank you.

So the fact that they are stating that an injunction is possible but dismissed on cost grounds means the lease [ihas[/i been breached. Interesting. As pondered above, a breach would imply there could presumably be other implications and further-reaching consequences for the Allams, other than this immediate issue, should the council be willing to pursue them.

How rude you are. If you don't know the answers just don't reply. Easy.

£50k for an injunction would be a small price to pay, considering the consequences of doing nothing

Somebody should set up a fundrazor page for HCC injunction..that would be interesting

Exactly. This is the thin end of the wedge, and Allam knows it. If he gets away with this he'll see it as carte blanche.

I said on the 'city should we be concerned thread' that the council would do nowt because they don't have the knowhow, impetus or willing to stand up for what's right, as I said the council would blow a lot of hot air then let it dissapear, I can't see them changing tack now.
The saddest part would be that the council can't see the damage they're doing by not acting, even worse would be they can but still don't give a feck and want the line of least resistance, this is just the start of the slippery slope.

To be fair to HCC would the people of Hull be happy seeing tens of thousands of pounds being used on legal fees and expensive lawyers, when services across the city are being cut to the bone?

Well if alam is in the wrong then he pays the costs surely?

I would. Because the ultimate cost to the city will be the loss of not just Airco, but the KC will become out of bounds as City's ground only (no more community facility (and precious little now, I know)), there will probably be no Hull FC - a massive part of Hull's heritage, not just speaking as a fan - these three things belong to the public (I know Hull FC don't, but we are a community club with massive presence in the city) and amount to a lot more than £50,000.

Another question (being thick again, sorry), if the funds were donated to enable the council to fight the case, would the council legally be able accept the donation?

Allam really knows how to make friends .