Warren v Calzaghe - DING DING Round 1 .....

[lightheavy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/fe ... high-court

[lightheavy]

Joe will win

[observer1]

If Warren was old enough, maybe they could have took it to the ring. D

[hitman_hatton1]

joe in the witness box today then.

only been paid 1.2m.

that does seem low for a fight of hopkins proportions. :>

love to see joe get the ruling.

[Chambers2]

love to see joe get the ruling.

Yeah and me, Warren shouldn't be allowed to hold his boxers to ransom by saying you don't fight unless you sign a further contract extension, which is what it looks he's doing to me.

Come on Joe!

[Chambers2]

Come on Joe!

oh my god!!!! what did you just say chambers2?

The lesser of 2 evils

DING! DING! Round 3

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7908524.stm

Boxer Calzaghe 'was not misled'

Boxing promoter allegedly has told the High Court he never misled undefeated world champion Joe Calzaghe while acting as his manager.

Mr Warren is claiming the super-middleweight owes him £1m for breaking a verbal contract for one more fight.

However, the Welsh boxer claims he is owed £2m in unpaid fees.

His legal team put it to Mr Warren that there had been a conflict of interest between his role as the Newbridge fighter's manager and his promoter.

He held this role for 10 years from 1997, when Mr Calzaghe took over promoting his own fights until he retired undefeated earlier this year.

Ian Mill QC said as manager he was supposed to look after the boxer's best interests but as promoter he had to "secure all due profit and reward" for his company.

It could mean paying "as little as possible" to Mr Calzaghe and selecting fights in the best interests of the promoter rather than the boxer.

Mr Warren called such claims "ridiculous", adding: "He can't say that I done him down.

"I advised him which fights would be good for him at each stage of his career."

Mr Mill asked: "As manager or promoter?"

"I was doing it as a friend, but probably all three," said Mr Warren.

"Why are you trying to say I misled him in his career when it was a textbook career?"

He told the judge Mr Justice Wyn Williams: "Each time I was negotiating for Mr Calzaghe I was setting up a programme of fights, which is what he asked for.

"He approached me to manage and promote him."

Mr Mills said: "Can I suggest to you that the reason you want to be manager and promoter is so you do not have any person interfering with your business interests as promoter."

"That is not true," said Mr Warren.

'Dehydration and hunger'

Mr Mill disputed Mr Warren's claim that he had ceased to manage Mr Calzaghe in 2007 because his contract had expired.

"That is not why you stopped. The reason you stopped was because Joe Calzaghe didn't want you to manage him."

Mr Warren replied: "He said he wanted to manage himself."

On Monday, the court heard Mr Calzaghe had claimed he had been persuaded to sign deals under duress whilst suffering dehydration and hunger preparing for fights.

Mr Warren's legal team rejected this, producing copies of contracts which they said were always scrutinised by the fighter's solicitors.

The case is continuing.

It's getting messy

[Colesy]

Warren is just introducing an element of doubt into Calzaghes defense and beoming a pain in the arse. All tactics to force a settlement.

Lets hope all our potential stars are watching this, Frank is clearly not a good bloke to jump into bed with.

[WildWaylon]

Judges decision FW owes JC 1 million and JC owes FW 1 million, the result a draw.

[ArtOfWar]

I don't see how a verbal contract can be binding. I mean how do you prove that someone agreed to something like that?

[liamlion]

I don't see how a verbal contract can be binding. I mean how do you prove that someone agreed to something like that?

Here's a really basic, stripped down example of a verbal contract and how one can attempt to prove it...

I meet with you in person (along with a friend of mine) and you verbally offer to sell me your car for £1500.00. I verbally accept and shake hands on an agreement with you that I will pay you all of the £1500.00 upfront and in return you will deliver me the car to my address within 7 days of my money clearing in your account.

I meet with my bank manager and explain that I want a £1500.00 loan to buy a car from you. He duly provides me with the money.

I pay you £1500.00 (as agreed) but I do not receive the car from you after 7 days. You refuse to give me the car stating that no such contract ever existed. Accordingly, I sue you for breach of contract. I evidence the fact that a verbal contract existed between me and you by:

- Forwarding to the court my bank statement which shows £1500.00 being paid from my bank account into yours;
- I produce a witness (my friend who was present when we verbally agreed the deal) and his gives an account that backs up my version of events (E.g. the terms of the agreement); and
- I produce a further witness, my bank manager who confirms that I obtained a loan from the bank for £1500.00 on the basis that I had said that I was buying a car from you with the money.

Now it would be for you (the respondent) to rebut the existence of the contract...

[Wheelchair]

If I was the judge I'd be wearing a black cap before delivering the verdict! To the tower with both of 'em!

Warren is responsible for utterly ruining British boxing, and Calzaghe is a poor excuse for a world class fighter.