Hamish has believed this for a long time; essentially he thinks that if a club brings a suit to declare the trust invalid, it will succeed. In a vacuum, he'd probably be right.
But we don't live in a vacuum. We live in a world of some seriously badass lawyers, and Hamish showed yet again last year - when he was counsel for Iain Murray - that he just doesn't have a handle on what makes the the law tick up here in the states.
And then there is the little fact that he was General Counsel for the team, Alinghi, that was representing the then Trustee, SNG, and he never made this argument to the NY Supreme Court. All the while he was creating a fake club to be the Challenger. So yeah...there's that to.
So your argument is that Ross must be mistaken because one of his clients was a stinker.
IIRC one of the attorneys who previously turned up here to post also took the view that the charitable status of the Deed probably would not bear scrutiny but that it would only come under examination if someone with standing and suitably deep pocket wanted to make that argument. Since such litigants generally want to win the AC game rather than terminate it, that has never happened.
Since one of the thrusts of the AC34 protocol was to refer disputes to the Jury rather than a court, Ross certainly is not the only person holding the view that that lawyering hurts the Cup.
No....it is my opinion that Hamish Ross is a duplicitous piece of shit. And I mean no offense to shit. Alinghi was not a client, it was his employer. He was advancing this argument while he was engaged in helping to craft the protocol for AC 33, which gave ALL the power of EVERYTHING to the Defender. He tried the whole "Having" argument.
And yes, there have been several lawyers who have tried to advance the argument about the Deed of Gift not being a charitable trust, and one pretend lawyer in MSP. So in the end, MSP and Ross are actually far closer in ideology than apart. They only differ by degree of the evidence and timeline they present.
The only way the Deed is ever going to be challenged successful in the NY Court is for there to be something so egregious with money that the AG has to step in, or, the Defender goes to the Court and asks for it to be amended as Ross wants. He was with a then defender for AC 33, yet he never elected to take that path.
And the asshole actually works for the more recent defender, and just weeks after his employ is up, he starts up with this crap again. He's just a lawyer looking to present a problem that might need to be solved, to present something that might cause a bit of a distraction for the defender. So the only real question is which Challenger will hire him to go fuck with Larry, his most recent employer.
To him I say, good luck with that. And you better be careful what you wish for.
Larry gets accused of fixing the game to his advantage, but clearly he did not do so. The protocol for AC 34 never would have been allowed to exist but for his approval. So Larry clearly wanted the lawyers out of the equation, and yet what happens, here comes ADM with seemingly a bunch of evidence from....Alinghi.
Anyone else see a potential connection?