34th cup?

luminary

Anarchist
714
54
looking into the future a bit, if/when the cup is raced in Oct, it is highly likely that there will be continuing legal squables that may go on for some time.

Let's make the assumption that whoever wins offers a reasonable protocol, accepts a valid challenge and a normal cup cycle is possible.

To what extent is any on going legal f'ing around going to make it possible to actually complete the subsequent regatta - even to the point were legal issues are resolved after the 34th winner is determined?

 

UniGor

Anarchist
889
0
The Bar
If I have this right (unlikely :unsure: ) SNG (or GGYC for that matter) will only get one crack at appealing and that has to be within 30 days of JC's order being handed down. So, I would hope that by October all the legal shit will be finished.

Unless one side finds fresh new ways to fling their nappy contents at the other.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

luminary

Anarchist
714
54
If I have this right (unlikely :unsure: ) SNG (or GGYC for that matter) will only get one crack at appealing and that has to be within 30 days of JC's order being handed down. So, I would hope that by October all the legal shit will be finished.
Unless one side finds fresh new ways to fling their nappy contents at the other.
As I understand it they can appeal again and again so long as they have something fresh to appeal against, and once the race has been raced, the court will probably not be in any rush to resolve the case which means that outcomes might be a long time coming.

I hope that I've got some part of that wrong.

 

luminary

Anarchist
714
54
As I understand it they can appeal again and again so long as they have something fresh to appeal against, and once the race has been raced, the court will probably not be in any rush to resolve the case which means that outcomes might be a long time coming.
I hope that I've got some part of that wrong.
for example, lets say that USA wins in Oct and sets up a V5 regatta in 2010 which, say, Origin (he he) wins. In 2011 the court overturns some ruling and says that USA wasnt able to compete..(I know - unlikely), - where does that leave Origin, and if there is this sort of uncertainty, how is this going to impact the decision of teams interested in entering the 34th regatta?

 

Sparbuilder

Anarchist
846
0
If I have this right (unlikely :unsure: ) SNG (or GGYC for that matter) will only get one crack at appealing and that has to be within 30 days of JC's order being handed down. So, I would hope that by October all the legal shit will be finished.
Unless one side finds fresh new ways to fling their nappy contents at the other.

SNG could start a whole new suit with the rediculous "custom house registry" deal. Their notes sent to GGYC practically states that they will.

Of course they could challenge the validity of the registry and how the measurements were calculated in relation to the Larry's monster.

Then a lawsuit from GGYC forcing a venue to be named if SNG refuses to divulge that info after a reasonable time expires from the date of race announcement.

Another lawsuit regarding a potentially rediculous set of race rules

I can think of a ton or ways that squabbles could go on and on. Hopefully they will not postpone the October racing.

SB

 

KingMonkey

Super Anarchist
1,808
113
London
BO wins. Challenge from TNZ for a 2010 match which gets precisely 23 minutes of TV coverage.

Alinghi wins. Challenge from Shosholoza / Origin / The French for a 2011 Valencia match in AC 90s.

 

diverg

Super Anarchist
1,392
0
Houston, Tx
If Oracle wins AC 33 and Alinghi appeals after the race, I do not believe their will be an AC 34 until AC 33 and all of the possible appeals have been exhausted.

 

luminary

Anarchist
714
54
If Oracle wins AC 33 and Alinghi appeals after the race, I do not believe their will be an AC 34 until AC 33 and all of the possible appeals have been exhausted.
yet we see in this case that the race will occur and the cup will be passed to the next winner despite ongoing legal issues, and as precedent, the Mercury Bay example didnt seem to hold up the subsequent cup. So I'm not sure I agree, I just am not sure to what extent it impacts.

And if (in the example above) Origin wins, and start organizing its subsequent regatta - who is going to be able to take it from them, if they won it fair and square from the rightful owners at the time. (Im sure there is a simple legal answer to that one).

 

Sandstone

Super Anarchist
1,527
1
West MI
looking into the future a bit, if/when the cup is raced in Oct, it is highly likely that there will be continuing legal squables that may go on for some time.
Let's make the assumption that whoever wins offers a reasonable protocol, accepts a valid challenge and a normal cup cycle is possible.

To what extent is any on going legal f'ing around going to make it possible to actually complete the subsequent regatta - even to the point were legal issues are resolved after the 34th winner is determined?

In my opinion that once a clear race winner is defined and a new challenger is accepted, void an injunction inhibiting the winners ability to accept said challenge, the party who causes further delay through litigation or otherwise could be liable for sustained losses if the Court decided the delaying party's action was without merit, or that the tactics utilized by the delaying party outside of the perview of the court exuded undue influence over the future event in such a manner that it caused injury to the financial interest of ANY party therein. (I.e.Defender, CoR, Sponsors, other challengers, venue host, etc.)

having stated the above, the party who continues litigation beyond the race on the water should take heed to be damn certain they are 100% right in doing so and have the legal talent behind them to back it up.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

luminary

Anarchist
714
54
In my opinion that once a clear race winner is defined and a new challenger is accepted, void an injunction inhibiting the winners ability to accept said challenge, the party who causes further delay through litigation or otherwise could be liable for sustained losses if the Court decided the delaying party's action was without merit, or that the tactics utilized by the delaying party outside of the perview of the court exuded undue influence over the future event in such a manner that it caused financial injury to the financial interest of ANY party therein. (I.e.Defender, CoR, Sponsors, other challengers, venue host, etc.)
I like this answer the best. This will henceforth be the answer to the question.

 

sleipnir

Member
141
0
BO wins. Challenge from TNZ for a 2010 match which gets precisely 23 minutes of TV coverage.
Alinghi wins. Challenge from Shosholoza / Origin / The French for a 2011 Valencia match in AC 90s.
Either wins - a Challenge from a carefully selected foreign yacht club with annual ragatta on the sea, representing the Anarchy Sailing Team, arrives at the winning club by e-mail 4.7 seconds ahead of the presentation of the collusive challenge on board the winner's yacht. ;)

 
Top