BoxRec

As the title says.
FW ordered to pay Burns £100k still not paid from the Mitchell fight and is now going to the British board to try and get him suspended until he pays up

fvcking hell.

Good.

Though knowing fishface, he will have a trick or two up his sleeve like some third rate Bond villain.

Full judgement up later

http://www.matchroomboxing.com/news/sta ... cky-burns/


Getting nasty

I for one didn't think ricky could win the case, well done ricky although the board will bottle it when it comes to acting

Burns has to pay FW £73k in back manger fees. Burns owed the £103k from allegedly Promotions, which is in Liquidation so who knows how much he will get.

Burns wins the case and could end up out of pocket, justice?

I'd love to post my opinion on this, but FW will probably sue me if I do

DazDiCanio wrote:Burns has to pay FW £73k in back manger fees. Burns owed the £103k from allegedly Promotions, which is in Liquidation so who knows how much he will get.

Burns wins the case and could end up out of pocket, justice?

surely he can take that back to court and just withhold payment of 73k against the 103 leaving FW still owing him 30k

Wow, Bunny must be losing some money. I bet Eddie is enjoying his corn flakes this morning.

TopGun wrote:Wow, Bunny must be losing some money. I bet Eddie is enjoying his corn flakes this morning.

?

Ricky has to pay Frank £73K. Frank doesn't have to pay Ricky anything.

but that agreement FW had, seems to be illegal with the board so i bet we've not heard the end of this one yet

think i might speak to my lawyer before posting a comment on this!

When this type of topic pops up, Spud's absence is most noticeable. He'd have been flapping like a wounded mallard trying to edit/post/delete/ban/hint all at the same time. Hope he's doing well?

jackukmma wrote:

DazDiCanio wrote:Burns has to pay FW £73k in back manger fees. Burns owed the £103k from allegedly Promotions, which is in Liquidation so who knows how much he will get.

Burns wins the case and could end up out of pocket, justice?

surely he can take that back to court and just withhold payment of 73k against the 103 leaving FW still owing him 30k

Different because it's personal money Burns owes Frank. Legally, Frank doesn't owe Burns anything. Total horrible situation, FW needs to man up and do the right thing or he's losing a lot of punters.

***** ****** was found to have lied in Court about an alleged oral agreement relating to Burns. His evidence was described as “untruthful”, “unrealistic” and “unreliable” by the Judge, Mr Justice Knowles. ****** had previously been found to have lied in his litigation with Joe Calzaghe.

Mr Justice Knowles added that “despite the duties of ****** and ***** ****** ********* to give proper disclosure of documents relevant to this matter, the quality of the disclosure in fact given was shockingly poor”.




Whilst Alex Morrison was officially Burns’ manager, ****** got Burns to sign a side agreement (outside the rules of the British Boxing Board of Control) entitling him to a share of his management commission. It was Burns’ evidence in Court that the side agreement was produced in the dressing room before a big fight – he was required to remove his glove to sign the agreement and told if he didn’t do so he would not fight

Sklar wrote:When this type of topic pops up, Spud's absence is most noticeable. He'd have been flapping like a wounded mallard trying to edit/post/delete/ban/hint all at the same time. Hope he's doing well?

freddydoesdallas wrote:think i might speak to my lawyer before posting a comment on this!

Just read the entire judgment of this case. It's very damning. All that talk of this case being a dead cert by his lawyers looks hollow now. And the final section of the judgement shows even the judge can see Ricky isn't going to see a penny of what he is owed by FWP.

Sklar wrote:

TopGun wrote:Wow, Bunny must be losing some money. I bet Eddie is enjoying his corn flakes this morning.

?

Ricky has to pay Frank £73K. Frank doesn't have to pay Ricky anything.

Frank owes Ricky 102k

TopGun wrote:

Sklar wrote:

TopGun wrote:Wow, Bunny must be losing some money. I bet Eddie is enjoying his corn flakes this morning.

?

Ricky has to pay Frank £73K. Frank doesn't have to pay Ricky anything.

Frank owes Ricky 102k

A company owed Ricky the money.

this was in the article:

It was Burns’ evidence in Court that the side agreement was produced in the dressing room before a big fight – he was required to remove his glove to sign the agreement and told if he didn’t do so he would not fight.

wow

What's so b*stard hard about saying and doing what you said you would do? I don't mean this in relation to any of the parties here, as I don't know the details personally. Although the judge describes Wabben's disclosure as "shockingly poor", which I guess is on record now.

I'm sick of hearing about these disputes in boxing, they're a fr*gging joke. As an "industry" boxers - by which I mean boxers who earn decent money - seem to be represented too highly in what I guess are like employment tribunals. In fact why aren't they dealt with by the Employment Tribunals?

magwitch wrote:this was in the article:

It was Burns’ evidence in Court that the side agreement was produced in the dressing room before a big fight – he was required to remove his glove to sign the agreement and told if he didn’t do so he would not fight.

wow

What's so b*stard hard about saying and doing what you said you would do? I don't mean this in relation to any of the parties here, as I don't know the details personally. Although the judge describes Wabben's disclosure as "shockingly poor", which I guess is on record now.

I'm sick of hearing about these disputes in boxing, they're a fr*gging joke. As an "industry" boxers - by which I mean boxers who earn decent money - seem to be represented too highly in what I guess are like employment tribunals. In fact why aren't they dealt with by the Employment Tribunals?

because Employment Tribunals are for employees in relation to employers. and neither Burns nor ******* are in an employer/emplyee relation.

I hope we hear something from the board on this.

freddydoesdallas wrote:

TopGun wrote:

Sklar wrote:
?

Ricky has to pay Frank £73K. Frank doesn't have to pay Ricky anything.

Frank owes Ricky 102k

A company owed Ricky the money.

This.

..........

(Post deleted after legal advice).