I also read about "the contract he signed", it just doesn't make sense to then have a dispute as whether there was an early termination clause in it, or not. You'd merely have to look.



IF a contract is written, but then something additional is agreed verbally, then technically it counts, but how would you prove it?



The point in similar circumstances is an employer has no choice but to accept an existing contract warts and all, but that (if written) would be the extent of it for both parties. If some time later, the employer claims there's an additional verbal wart, then how would he know? And how would he prove it? Call the previous employers who alleged it as witnesses?



Would be interesting to know how those general observations fit the facts of this case, but I doubt we'll find out as I expect a deal surely must be done.

As the old adage goes FA, "a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on".

Cramer states, "We are aware that Bradford believe there was an early-termination clause but that was not what was agreed."



This is very curious language. Bradford believe there WAS an early termination clause. Does it no longer exist? 'but that was not what was agreed'. is he saying the contract contains a 'clause' that wasn't agreed.



Either, Green has had site of a written clause in the contract.

or

Cummins gave his word to Green at the outset of the season in front of witnesses that he would resign if we were in the relegation places at a certain juncture.

or

There is no verbal or written clause .

I wonder if MG is trying to argue that with relegation his 3rd yr would be null and void ala a playing contract? Not sure if coaches contracts would be same as players, ie a super league contract???

Interesting point.

You would have thought though that if this was the case it would form part of the written contract - so would not be open to dispute?

If that is the case would suspect MG is arguing we were as good as down and ended up relegated and FC is arguing mathematically we weren't down? Also could FC be claiming without a six point deduction and admin that meant him getting rid of 3 players meant he had little chance. Could say all arguments hold water hence no agreement can be reached

Yes, but adages aren't that reliable as a source of legal precedent





I'd place more reliance on actual cases. Such as

[url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1254.html[iBVM Management -v- Yeomans[/i[/url, which included a dispute about a verbal contract where one party was saying it included a three-month early termination clause, and the other denied it. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision that there WAS such a clause, even though no written contract was ever signed.

From what I know a contractual agreement (Contract) on the transfer of a business to a new company with a different method of trading to the previous company under a TUPE arrangement has to fulfill obligations under existig contracts, however the contract at TUPE can be re negotiated to the benefit (not detriment) of the person/persons under contract/s, but redundancies and dismissals can take place in the event that the New company cannot perform to it's original projections, when the transfer of undertaking took place.

In other words I, like you, haven't a clue what transpired.

Don't worry, Cameron has workers' hard-won rights under TUPE firmly in his basstard sights the same as all other workers' protections.

I suspect Cameron will be rather more worried about the multitude of sights trained on him in the next few days than have time to have time to trample on the plebs

I blame Thatcher.