| In house legal team? 13:06 - Sep 23 with 1836 views | Vic |
Blimey - must be expecting the worst from the EFL re Blackburn game. Quick work though getting this in place so soon! |  |
| |  |
| In house legal team? on 13:08 - Sep 23 with 1785 views | homer_123 |
Laura is the name of ChatGPT? |  |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:09 - Sep 23 with 1756 views | NthQldITFC |
They've had a tip off that someone is considering throwing a crisp packet quite close to Delia's car on the fifth of October, and are getting ready deal with the inevitable backlash. |  |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:17 - Sep 23 with 1636 views | J2BLUE |
I assume you are joking? Genuinely hard to tell! |  |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 with 1583 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| In house legal team? on 13:17 - Sep 23 by J2BLUE |
I assume you are joking? Genuinely hard to tell! |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |  |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:22 - Sep 23 with 1563 views | Vic |
| In house legal team? on 13:17 - Sep 23 by J2BLUE |
I assume you are joking? Genuinely hard to tell! |
I am! | |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:26 - Sep 23 with 1480 views | Illinoisblue |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
You don’t recruit and appoint someone to that level of a position in two days. |  |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:28 - Sep 23 with 1435 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
These appointments don't happen in days, so I'd assume it's been in the works for months.
Most top clubs have in-house council these days, due to the complexities of modern football legal requirements - much more of a full time job than it ever used to be. Even Norwich (not a top club) have in-house legal council. |  | | |
| In house legal team? on 13:29 - Sep 23 with 1418 views | chantryblueboy |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
Do well to get one appointed by Tuesday to deal with a problem that occurred on Saturday | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| In house legal team? on 13:30 - Sep 23 with 1380 views | davblue |
| In house legal team? on 13:26 - Sep 23 by Illinoisblue |
You don’t recruit and appoint someone to that level of a position in two days. |
No but it’s a coincidence that it’s happened or something like that…. |  | | |
| In house legal team? on 13:30 - Sep 23 with 1383 views | J2BLUE |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
Why would you bring in an in house lawyer for something like that? Makes zero sense for a one off event that will likely go in our favour anyway.
Far more likely to be for contracts, planning permission, construction laws etc etc? | |
| |
| In house legal team? on 13:36 - Sep 23 with 1276 views | burnbudgiesburn |
| In house legal team? on 13:28 - Sep 23 by SuffolkPunchFC |
These appointments don't happen in days, so I'd assume it's been in the works for months.
Most top clubs have in-house council these days, due to the complexities of modern football legal requirements - much more of a full time job than it ever used to be. Even Norwich (not a top club) have in-house legal council. |
The announcement being made now won't hurt though!
The angst over this decision is amazing tbh, it should be just an open and shut case of following precedent and previous rulings in this situation but because we're Ipswich we fear this weird stuff always happens to us! | | | |
| In house legal team? on 13:39 - Sep 23 with 1223 views | PrideOfTheEast |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
Been in the offing for ages. Makes sense given the amount going on - development, commercial, multiple owners etc. | | | |
| In house legal team? on 13:40 - Sep 23 with 1204 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| In house legal team? on 13:36 - Sep 23 by burnbudgiesburn |
The announcement being made now won't hurt though!
The angst over this decision is amazing tbh, it should be just an open and shut case of following precedent and previous rulings in this situation but because we're Ipswich we fear this weird stuff always happens to us! |
Agree completely on both of those points  | | | |
| In house legal team? on 13:41 - Sep 23 with 1175 views | patrickswell |
Presumably to prosecute darkhorse28 for persistent malicious content. |  | | |
| In house legal team? on 13:42 - Sep 23 with 1166 views | lowhouseblue |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
recruiting someone in 3 days would be going some. in any case, if the outcome is anything other than a full replay - and i think for it not to be a full replay is inconceivable - the first thing the club would do is go out to a kc with expertise in this specific area. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| In house legal team? on 14:17 - Sep 23 with 862 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| In house legal team? on 13:26 - Sep 23 by Illinoisblue |
You don’t recruit and appoint someone to that level of a position in two days. |
Fairy nuff. | |
| |
| In house legal team? on 14:24 - Sep 23 with 788 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| In house legal team? on 13:30 - Sep 23 by J2BLUE |
Why would you bring in an in house lawyer for something like that? Makes zero sense for a one off event that will likely go in our favour anyway.
Far more likely to be for contracts, planning permission, construction laws etc etc? |
Just the timing seemed prescient.
The "far more likely" options you cite have all been and gone haven't they?
Obviously contracts will be signed in the future... but the latest batch have just been completed, so it would be a bit odd timing to hire someone for that right after the transfer window's shut and all contracts signed. Most, if not all, of the planning permission has been approved, hasn't it?
I don't doubt everyone's right that you wouldn't hire a lawyer so quickly, I guess I'm just a little surprised we didn't already have one! | |
| |
| In house legal team? on 14:24 - Sep 23 with 785 views | bluesbrothers |
| In house legal team? on 13:21 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not that much of a stretch is it? Very coincidental timing otherwise! Why else would we suddenly need an in-house lawyer? |
Been hiring for at least 6 months. Someone at my company was headhunted but turned it down as required moving to Ipswich | | | |
| In house legal team? on 14:37 - Sep 23 with 681 views | chantryblueboy |
| In house legal team? on 14:24 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Just the timing seemed prescient.
The "far more likely" options you cite have all been and gone haven't they?
Obviously contracts will be signed in the future... but the latest batch have just been completed, so it would be a bit odd timing to hire someone for that right after the transfer window's shut and all contracts signed. Most, if not all, of the planning permission has been approved, hasn't it?
I don't doubt everyone's right that you wouldn't hire a lawyer so quickly, I guess I'm just a little surprised we didn't already have one! |
Or the amount of stuff we’ve had to do identified that this was something we’d need going forward. Planning permission etc likely to be ever more relevant as we look to redevelop the ground where there are far more stakeholders you have to keep at bay | | | |
| In house legal team? on 15:50 - Sep 23 with 478 views | FrimleyBlue |
| In house legal team? on 14:24 - Sep 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Just the timing seemed prescient.
The "far more likely" options you cite have all been and gone haven't they?
Obviously contracts will be signed in the future... but the latest batch have just been completed, so it would be a bit odd timing to hire someone for that right after the transfer window's shut and all contracts signed. Most, if not all, of the planning permission has been approved, hasn't it?
I don't doubt everyone's right that you wouldn't hire a lawyer so quickly, I guess I'm just a little surprised we didn't already have one! |
Considering we've spent a fair bit and of course got some funds in too, We probably need one to help us with any potential EFL financial battles considering how leicester etc get away with things. |  |
| |
| In house legal team? on 15:57 - Sep 23 with 406 views | davblue |
| In house legal team? on 14:37 - Sep 23 by chantryblueboy |
Or the amount of stuff we’ve had to do identified that this was something we’d need going forward. Planning permission etc likely to be ever more relevant as we look to redevelop the ground where there are far more stakeholders you have to keep at bay |
It's to complete the full buy out of the land from the Council.
New 85,000 all seater stadium to be built on Portman Road. | | | |
| In house legal team? on 16:03 - Sep 23 with 376 views | HighgateBlue |
A commercial organisation the size of ITFC will always need legal advice and representation in a wide number of different contexts. Like with many services, there will always be a decision between having an in-house team, or appointing external specialists each time (the same decision will exist in relation to what accountancy expertise to employ full-time, and what to contract on an ad hoc basis, for example).
They've obviously decided that they want an in-house lawyer - it may be cheaper and easier to have someone employed full-time. This decision has obviously not been taken since the weekend - that is absurd. She is moving jobs from Scotland (although it's not clear whether she will be based in Ipswich rather than remote, despite the expression "in-house").
When Town make legal submissions on something important like the Blackburn game, they may well still instruct external solicitors or barristers, even if they do have in-house lawyers. When a firm is in litigation (or quasi-litigation like this), they very often get their in-house solicitors to instruct barristers, or get additional external litigation solicitors to instruct barristers. So she may well not be terribly involved with drafting those submissions.
As an aside, Ms McCallum seems to be a Scottish solicitor, and it's not clear from anything stated publicly that she's qualified in England and Wales. If she isn't (I don't know, but she doesn't seem to be listed on the Law Society website), then the Club would certainly need external solicitors if they were to end up in Court litigation (such as the Sheepy era High Court fight over the planning permission for the new stand). That is not to say that she is the wrong appointment at all, just that the Club may very well need legal services of lots of different kinds in different situations, but have calculated that they want an in-house "lawyer" (I don't say solicitor, because as I say, I don't know whether she's a solicitor qualified in England and Wales). "General counsel" is just an Americanised term meaning "head in-house lawyer (in a team that may have nobody else in it, or may have loads)". |  | | |
| In house legal team? on 17:44 - Sep 23 with 156 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| In house legal team? on 16:03 - Sep 23 by HighgateBlue |
A commercial organisation the size of ITFC will always need legal advice and representation in a wide number of different contexts. Like with many services, there will always be a decision between having an in-house team, or appointing external specialists each time (the same decision will exist in relation to what accountancy expertise to employ full-time, and what to contract on an ad hoc basis, for example).
They've obviously decided that they want an in-house lawyer - it may be cheaper and easier to have someone employed full-time. This decision has obviously not been taken since the weekend - that is absurd. She is moving jobs from Scotland (although it's not clear whether she will be based in Ipswich rather than remote, despite the expression "in-house").
When Town make legal submissions on something important like the Blackburn game, they may well still instruct external solicitors or barristers, even if they do have in-house lawyers. When a firm is in litigation (or quasi-litigation like this), they very often get their in-house solicitors to instruct barristers, or get additional external litigation solicitors to instruct barristers. So she may well not be terribly involved with drafting those submissions.
As an aside, Ms McCallum seems to be a Scottish solicitor, and it's not clear from anything stated publicly that she's qualified in England and Wales. If she isn't (I don't know, but she doesn't seem to be listed on the Law Society website), then the Club would certainly need external solicitors if they were to end up in Court litigation (such as the Sheepy era High Court fight over the planning permission for the new stand). That is not to say that she is the wrong appointment at all, just that the Club may very well need legal services of lots of different kinds in different situations, but have calculated that they want an in-house "lawyer" (I don't say solicitor, because as I say, I don't know whether she's a solicitor qualified in England and Wales). "General counsel" is just an Americanised term meaning "head in-house lawyer (in a team that may have nobody else in it, or may have loads)". |
Why on earth would we hire someone who isn't qualified in England and Wales, so that we still need to use external solicitors? | |
| |
| In house legal team? on 17:54 - Sep 23 with 83 views | blueasfook |
| In house legal team? on 16:03 - Sep 23 by HighgateBlue |
A commercial organisation the size of ITFC will always need legal advice and representation in a wide number of different contexts. Like with many services, there will always be a decision between having an in-house team, or appointing external specialists each time (the same decision will exist in relation to what accountancy expertise to employ full-time, and what to contract on an ad hoc basis, for example).
They've obviously decided that they want an in-house lawyer - it may be cheaper and easier to have someone employed full-time. This decision has obviously not been taken since the weekend - that is absurd. She is moving jobs from Scotland (although it's not clear whether she will be based in Ipswich rather than remote, despite the expression "in-house").
When Town make legal submissions on something important like the Blackburn game, they may well still instruct external solicitors or barristers, even if they do have in-house lawyers. When a firm is in litigation (or quasi-litigation like this), they very often get their in-house solicitors to instruct barristers, or get additional external litigation solicitors to instruct barristers. So she may well not be terribly involved with drafting those submissions.
As an aside, Ms McCallum seems to be a Scottish solicitor, and it's not clear from anything stated publicly that she's qualified in England and Wales. If she isn't (I don't know, but she doesn't seem to be listed on the Law Society website), then the Club would certainly need external solicitors if they were to end up in Court litigation (such as the Sheepy era High Court fight over the planning permission for the new stand). That is not to say that she is the wrong appointment at all, just that the Club may very well need legal services of lots of different kinds in different situations, but have calculated that they want an in-house "lawyer" (I don't say solicitor, because as I say, I don't know whether she's a solicitor qualified in England and Wales). "General counsel" is just an Americanised term meaning "head in-house lawyer (in a team that may have nobody else in it, or may have loads)". |
I hope we get Saul Goodman. Or maybe the Lincoln lawyer. Hes good too. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
