23XI statement on not signing Charter agreement

Scoop Gordon here. We are waiting on the F-1 lawyers to make a motion in the case of Nascar, Indycar and 23XI et all. Stay tuned for more.
 
31nw4d.jpg
 
I really don't know much about our judicial system, is this common for a judge to be so outspoken in this regard?
Depends on the judge. Bell has been trying to get them to work it out away from the court. Now it is getting complicated and with the time constraints, now time is of the essence.
 
I really don't know much about our judicial system, is this common for a judge to be so outspoken in this regard?
This is a civil suit, not a criminal one. There's no jury to be influenced or contaminated, the judge himself will make all the decisions. His opinions are the only ones that have or will matter. Well, that matter until the eventual appeals reach the next judge(s).
 
This is a civil suit, not a criminal one. There's no jury to be influenced or contaminated, the judge himself will make all the decisions. His opinions are the only ones that have or will matter. Well, that matter until the eventual appeals reach the next judge(s).
Either way though civil or criminal some judges are outspoken, some aren't. Bell is in the hot seat with court dates that are already set.
 
You don't think he has a point? And you're an American watching the billionaires gobble up everything in sight and rig the system? The 75% goes in their pockets.
Righteous indignation also has nothing to do with the law. The judge's job isn't to decide 'right' or 'wrong', it's to decide what's conform within the laws passed by legislators and written in constitutions. Phelp's opinion (his word) and mine are irrelevant.
 
Righteous indignation also has nothing to do with the law. The judge's job isn't to decide 'right' or 'wrong', it's to decide what's conform within the laws passed by legislators and written in constitutions. Phelp's opinion (his word) and mine are irrelevant.
Sorry if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. It's a contract dispute in Nascar's eyes and that is the direction they are coming from. Calling an organization a monopoly is the claim.
 
The judge declared it an anti-trust case.

Presumably he will adjudicate accordingly.
 
I really don't know much about our judicial system, is this common for a judge to be so outspoken in this regard?

The judge is rightfully angry. This is a stupid pissing match of billionaires. Huge waste of time and money in an already backed up legal system. Especially, since, in all likelihood this will end in mediation after everyone's poss runs dry.
 
Finally some reasoning. "We're going to sue you because your system is unfair, but please let us operate under the unfair system until we can try to squeeze some more money out of you in court"
 
Finally some reasoning. "We're going to sue you because your system is unfair, but please let us operate under the unfair system until we can try to squeeze some more money out of you in court"
Terrible ruling. It allowed them to not honor the contract, allowed them to complete buying the charters that other teams or outside investors could be interested in and made a joke out of the other teams who had signed up. I think they need to trot their happy asses back to the table. It sounds like the courts are on their last nerve.
 
Will this ruling allow the 6 drivers with the 2 teams to start looking around at other options?
Quite possibly. Will they? Doubtful; where is there to go that isn't a huge step down?

I think the teams' list of harm they were or could suffer included every possible downfall, regardless of probability. Those drivers were never going to walk and they still aren't.
 
Quite possibly. Will they? Doubtful; where is there to go that isn't a huge step down?

I think the teams' list of harm they were or could suffer included every possible downfall, regardless of probability. Those drivers were never going to walk and they still aren't.
Those drivers have had their contracts breached. They are under no obligation to have to stay. Will they leave or stay? Who knows.
 
Those drivers have had their contracts breached. They are under no obligation to have to stay. Will they leave or stay? Who knows.
Agreed but where the heck would they go? Leaving may nullify any personal services contracts the drivers have with manufacturers and sponsors. I guess Bubba has a line on flipping burgers.

The teams and drivers probably discussed this situation months ago.
 
Those drivers have had their contracts breached. They are under no obligation to have to stay. Will they leave or stay? Who knows.
Do we know what any of the 6 affected driver’s contracts say about their teams’ charter status?
 
and here we go.
The plain-spoken version of this is that the judge determined 23XI and Front Row needed charter status, for a document they did not sign last year, to protect the status quo until the December 1 trial but also because the teams showed that drivers and sponsors had opt-outs in their contracts if the teams didn’t have charters.
 
Do we know what any of the 6 affected driver’s contracts say about their teams’ charter status?
As I recall, according to the exemption suit the drivers' contracts specify driving a chartered car. The teams claimed without being able to operate with charters, they could lose their drivers.

'Could', not 'would'.
 
Back
Top Bottom