Hatton

[REAL_DEAL]

latest development on the FW V RH saga.
If hatton signed the letter he is screwed.

BBC :
allegedly allegedly has produced documentary evidence that he says confirms his Sports Network company has a binding contract with Ricky Hatton.
The contract for Hatton's bout with Ray Oliveira in December 2004 stated it was "pursuant to and in accordance with" a letter from Warren dated 7 December.

That letter stated Sports Network would promote Hatton's next four fights.

The fight contract was signed by Hatton and witnessed by Robert Smith of the British Boxing Board of Control.

The agreement was made on 11 December, the day of the fight with Oliveira.

Since then Hatton's only outing has been his world title victory over Kostya Tszyu.

Under such an agreement, Hatton would be tied to Sports Network for three more fights.

Hatton has denied any agreement tying him to Sports Network exists and that he should be free to talk to other promoters.

Warren initiated legal proceedings against Hatton earlier this month because of the disagreement.

too many people thorwing handbags at eacxh other to read that J, should be a new thread

[REAL_DEAL]

Any legal beagles on here who can confirm whether or not this is legally binding or not?

if i bump into Thomas Mesereau i will ask him.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Who?

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

Someone here stated (for what its worth) anything outside of a signed contract is not binding. They're making it sound like Ricky signed something, but if it wasn't in attachment to the contract I doubt its binding. If Ricky claims to have not seen the letter or disputes the contents of the letter it won't hold up imo.

Hatton will get screwed over by FW if its true though. I could see him been thrown in with Mayweather, Witter and Judah to get 3fights worth

[states]

Hatton will get screwed over by FW if its true though. I could see him been thrown in with Mayweather, Witter and Judah to get 3fights worth

Well, that wouldn't be too bad, would it?

[Loynesy]

James

As the forum's only solicitor (I think), let me offer my viewpoint.

If Sports Newtork and Hatton have a signed contract that expressly imports the terms and conditions of another contract into it, then prima facie, it should not actually matter whether Hatton signed or even read that prior contract.

However, I doubt it is as clear cut as that. It is always dangerous to bring one contract into another because (i) its sloppy legal drafting and (ii) what happens if there is any inconsistency between the two. If the prior letter merely says that Hatton will fight for SN three more times and nothing else in it contradicts with the contract Hatton signed for the Olivera fight, he is probably screwed, but I would imagine that the Novembber letter, the Olivra contract and the Kostya Tsyzu contract all have certain terms that are contradictory.

If someone showed me the contraxts, I'd give more of an opinion.

Right - that took me 15 minutes, and my charge out rate is 450 per hour. £112.50 plus VAT please James.

[KO Artist]

James

As the forum's only solicitor (I think), let me offer my viewpoint.

If Sports Newtork and Hatton have a signed contract that expressly imports the terms and conditions of another contract into it, then prima facie, it should not actually matter whether Hatton signed or even read that prior contract.

However, I doubt it is as clear cut as that. It is always dangerous to bring one contract into another because (i) its sloppy legal drafting and (ii) what happens if there is any inconsistency between the two. If the prior letter merely says that Hatton will fight for SN three more times and nothing else in it contradicts with the contract Hatton signed for the Olivera fight, he is probably screwed, but I would imagine that the Novembber letter, the Olivra contract and the Kostya Tsyzu contract all have certain terms that are contradictory.

If someone showed me the contraxts, I'd give more of an opinion.

Right - that took me 15 minutes, and my charge out rate is 450 per hour. £112.50 plus VAT please James.

Who do you work for, Linklaters? £450 an hour is horrendous.

I use a firm in Pilgrim Street, a big firm. I get a discounted rate of £250 ph.

£450 is a joke.

[jamesmcdonnell]

That seems really shonky to me. You can just slip in a clause into a contract which is pursuant to something which isn't legally binding, and that means that you are agreeing to the terms of the letter...soundy shaky

[steve689]

Thank the lord for legal aid...hmm maybe that's why i lost

[KO Artist]

That seems really shonky to me. You can just slip in a clause into a contract which is pursuant to something which isn't legally binding, and that means that you are agreeing to the terms of the letter...soundy shaky

the letter would have to be defined and annexed to the contract.

From what I hear the contract was signed BEFORE the letter was written.

[mrbassie]

Well would you say Witter is a draw? People who attend fights to see Hatton are not regular boxing fans in the main, they won't even know who Witter is.

Was Rios? Or were Holbaek-Pederson, Smith, Hutchinson, Vilches or Stewart?
I'm no Hatton hater, I like the guy a lot in fact but whether it was Allegedley or Hatton that was responsible, Witter has been strenuously avoided.

I would also say that people who are not regular boxing fans in the main (to use your terminology, wouldn't even have known who Tszyu was either, other than 'some bloke what was mentioned by that Jim Watt feller'

[silkov]

Ray Hattons assertion that he just dumped the letter in the bin without showing it to Ricky or even talking about its contents to Warren doesn't seem to be the soundest of things to have done to me.
As the contract wasn't challenged at the time Warren took it that the terms had been accepted.
Really both sides seem to have behaved quite sloppily. I bet there are a number of lawyers rubbing their palms together at the moment.... 8)

[jamesmcdonnell]

Well would you say Witter is a draw? People who attend fights to see Hatton are not regular boxing fans in the main, they won't even know who Witter is.

Was Rios? Or were Holbaek-Pederson, Smith, Hutchinson, Vilches or Stewart?
I'm no Hatton hater, I like the guy a lot in fact but whether it was Allegedley or Hatton that was responsible, Witter has been strenuously avoided.

I would also say that people who are not regular boxing fans in the main (to use your terminology, wouldn't even have known who Tszyu was either, other than 'some bloke what was mentioned by that Jim Watt feller'

That is EXACTLY my point. The reason the tickets went so fast for the Tszyu fight, was because it was made clear that the fight was for the title of 'main man in the division.' The IBF strap was almost irrelevant, it was the fact it was for a genuine title and proved Ricky was truly world class.

Similarly, the fight with Maussa will be sold as a unification battle.

You could put Hatton in with a deck chair and he would sell 16.000, for a unification fight it's easy to pack em out.

[REAL_DEAL]

Who?

he was michael jackson lawyer.

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

Ray Hattons assertion that he just dumped the letter in the bin without showing it to Ricky or even talking about its contents to Warren doesn't seem to be the soundest of things to have done to me.
As the contract wasn't challenged at the time Warren took it that the terms had been accepted.
Really both sides seem to have behaved quite sloppily. I bet there are a number of lawyers rubbing their palms together at the moment.... 8)

If Ricky didn't sign for it, or see it, could that put him in the clear?

[silkov]

Ray Hattons assertion that he just dumped the letter in the bin without showing it to Ricky or even talking about its contents to Warren doesn't seem to be the soundest of things to have done to me.
As the contract wasn't challenged at the time Warren took it that the terms had been accepted.
Really both sides seem to have behaved quite sloppily. I bet there are a number of lawyers rubbing their palms together at the moment.... 8)

If Ricky didn't sign for it, or see it, could that put him in the clear?

I doubt it.

[silkov]

Well would you say Witter is a draw? People who attend fights to see Hatton are not regular boxing fans in the main, they won't even know who Witter is.

Was Rios? Or were Holbaek-Pederson, Smith, Hutchinson, Vilches or Stewart?
I'm no Hatton hater, I like the guy a lot in fact but whether it was Allegedley or Hatton that was responsible, Witter has been strenuously avoided.

I would also say that people who are not regular boxing fans in the main (to use your terminology, wouldn't even have known who Tszyu was either, other than 'some bloke what was mentioned by that Jim Watt feller'

That is EXACTLY my point. The reason the tickets went so fast for the Tszyu fight, was because it was made clear that the fight was for the title of 'main man in the division.' The IBF strap was almost irrelevant, it was the fact it was for a genuine title and proved Ricky was truly world class.

Similarly, the fight with Maussa will be sold as a unification battle.

You could put Hatton in with a deck chair and he would sell 16.000, for a unification fight it's easy to pack em out.

And you'd pack them out even more for a Witter fight. Come on its commonsense!. I bet you anything that the pay per view would be much much higher for Hatton vs Witter than it will be for Hatton vs Maussa.
People rushed to see Hatton fight Tysu because Kostya was a genuine world class fighter, ...same thing would happen with Witter.

[Loynesy]

James

As the forum's only solicitor (I think), let me offer my viewpoint.

If Sports Newtork and Hatton have a signed contract that expressly imports the terms and conditions of another contract into it, then prima facie, it should not actually matter whether Hatton signed or even read that prior contract.

However, I doubt it is as clear cut as that. It is always dangerous to bring one contract into another because (i) its sloppy legal drafting and (ii) what happens if there is any inconsistency between the two. If the prior letter merely says that Hatton will fight for SN three more times and nothing else in it contradicts with the contract Hatton signed for the Olivera fight, he is probably screwed, but I would imagine that the Novembber letter, the Olivra contract and the Kostya Tsyzu contract all have certain terms that are contradictory.

If someone showed me the contraxts, I'd give more of an opinion.

Right - that took me 15 minutes, and my charge out rate is 450 per hour. £112.50 plus VAT please James.

Who do you work for, Linklaters? £450 an hour is horrendous.

I use a firm in Pilgrim Street, a big firm. I get a discounted rate of £250 ph.

£450 is a joke.

KO Artist - I work for a big US firm (worked at Clifford Chance for years). I agree 450 an hour is a lot of cash but my clients are big private equity companies, not the average fella on the street. I reckon they can afford it

[jamesmcdonnell]

Was Rios? Or were Holbaek-Pederson, Smith, Hutchinson, Vilches or Stewart?
I'm no Hatton hater, I like the guy a lot in fact but whether it was Allegedley or Hatton that was responsible, Witter has been strenuously avoided.

I would also say that people who are not regular boxing fans in the main (to use your terminology, wouldn't even have known who Tszyu was either, other than 'some bloke what was mentioned by that Jim Watt feller'

We will have to agree to disagree then.

That is EXACTLY my point. The reason the tickets went so fast for the Tszyu fight, was because it was made clear that the fight was for the title of 'main man in the division.' The IBF strap was almost irrelevant, it was the fact it was for a genuine title and proved Ricky was truly world class.

Similarly, the fight with Maussa will be sold as a unification battle.

You could put Hatton in with a deck chair and he would sell 16.000, for a unification fight it's easy to pack em out.

And you'd pack them out even more for a Witter fight. Come on its commonsense!. I bet you anything that the pay per view would be much much higher for Hatton vs Witter than it will be for Hatton vs Maussa.
People rushed to see Hatton fight Tysu because Kostya was a genuine world class fighter, ...same thing would happen with Witter.

[silkov]

We will have to agree to disagree then.

That is EXACTLY my point. The reason the tickets went so fast for the Tszyu fight, was because it was made clear that the fight was for the title of 'main man in the division.' The IBF strap was almost irrelevant, it was the fact it was for a genuine title and proved Ricky was truly world class.

Similarly, the fight with Maussa will be sold as a unification battle.

You could put Hatton in with a deck chair and he would sell 16.000, for a unification fight it's easy to pack em out.

And you'd pack them out even more for a Witter fight. Come on its commonsense!. I bet you anything that the pay per view would be much much higher for Hatton vs Witter than it will be for Hatton vs Maussa.
People rushed to see Hatton fight Tysu because Kostya was a genuine world class fighter, ...same thing would happen with Witter.

Yeh, whats your point?...

[coneye]

Zab v Mayweather, wil pull more than Hatton v any off them why easy there domestic.

In Britain Hatton v Witter will make Hatton more moneyqwhy easy its domestic,

Hatton v mayweathet or Zab may gross more , but the otlay will not be has much .

There you have it Hatton --- Witter is the money fight

[pasty_spud]

hatton could fight any of the other belt holder in fact anybody.. and still fill 65k @ the city of manchester stadium next summer...

and as for saying the zoo fight sold out so fast was because hatton was fighting zoo is talk bollocks...it was because ricky finally got his shot.i know people who went to that fight that had never heard of zoo...sad but true..

[nickd]

We will just have to wait for the outcome of the court action, but as I have said all along how can Warren prove what was actually in the letter he sent?

He can produce a typed letter with a date on it no doubt, but can he prove that was in the envelope they received? Plus this whole letter referring to earlier letters is dodgy ground surely? Warren should have just produced a contract at the end of the day then we wouldn't be here now!

I really don't think its that clearcut and the Hatton's legal team are confident it seems.

I hope it gets sorted quickly one way or the other.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Zab v Mayweather, wil pull more than Hatton v any off them why easy there domestic.

In Britain Hatton v Witter will make Hatton more moneyqwhy easy its domestic,

Hatton v mayweathet or Zab may gross more , but the otlay will not be has much .

There you have it Hatton --- Witter is the money fight

Utter cobblers.

Mayweather isn't even a draw, neither is Judah, Mayweather has featured in exactly how many PPV fights? I'll tell you, ONE, that's how many, and that's because he fought Gatti.

Judah hasn't even had a £500,000 payday, wonder why that is, could it be that he is not a draw?

Either man knows that there is a fortune to be made in fighting Hatton on his turf, because Hatton draws crowds than everyone save the likes of Oscar and Gatti can only dream about pulling in.

I believe that Hatton could draw a crowd of in excess of 30,000 if he fought at the Man City ground against Mayweather, I don't think Mayweather could draw those figures fighting Hatton in the USA, because although he's highly ranked by boxing officianados, he has only just broken into the mainstream.

Zab v Mayweather is a massive fight, no doubt, but in terms of asses on seats, it won't be huge, because neither man has much of a hometown following. There are few American fighters who can pull in crowds like Hatton can.

[jamesmcdonnell]

We will just have to wait for the outcome of the court action, but as I have said all along how can Warren prove what was actually in the letter he sent?

He can produce a typed letter with a date on it no doubt, but can he prove that was in the envelope they received? Plus this whole letter referring to earlier letters is dodgy ground surely? Warren should have just produced a contract at the end of the day then we wouldn't be here now!

I really don't think its that clearcut and the Hatton's legal team are confident it seems.

I hope it gets sorted quickly one way or the other.

Well surely they could produce a copy of the original file which is automatically dated when it is first generated?