Bernie Ecclestone wins F1 damages case

[woof]

Bernie Ecclestone wins F1 damages case
A judge has ruled in favour of Formula 1 boss Bernie Ecclestone, who was being sued for £85m ($140m) in damages
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26273031

[Lincsblokey]

But the judge also says

'Mr Ecclestone cannot be seen as a truthful or reliable witness'

[woof]

Lincsblokey said:

But the judge also says

'Mr Ecclestone cannot be seen as a truthful or reliable witness'

Still won some how - the secondhand car dealer still has the gift of the gab !

[McClure]

He didn't "win", he lost - the judge held that a corrupt deal was made. However as the corruption related to the identity of the purchaser, not the value at which the shares were sold, there was no loss to the German company and so no damages are payable.

[eps]

Mr Justice Newey, no relation to Adrian???

[anonymous-user]

Lincsblokey said:

But the judge also says

'Mr Ecclestone cannot be seen as a truthful or reliable witness'

It needed a high court judge to figure that one out?

[London424]

Now I'm no lawyer but the way I read this could have some interesting consequences for his criminal trial.

So although he has "won" and is not liable for any financial payment the judge has put these statements on record

"The payments were a bribe. They were made because Mr Ecclestone had entered into a corrupt agreement with Dr Gribkowsky on May 2005 under which Dr Gribkowsky was to be rewarded for facilitating the sale of BLB's shares in the F1 Group to a buyer acceptable to Mr Ecclestone.

"Mr Ecclestone's aim was to be rid of the banks. He was strongly averse to their involvement in the F1 Group and was keen that their shares should be transferred to someone more congenial to him."

The judge also said: "Even... making allowances for the lapse of time and Mr Ecclestone's age, I am afraid that I find it impossible to regard him as a reliable or truthful witness."

The trial in April will be very interesting...and that one carries jail time!

[tobinen]

McClure said:

He didn't "win", he lost - the judge held that a corrupt deal was made. However as the corruption related to the identity of the purchaser, not the value at which the shares were sold, there was no loss to the German company and so no damages are payable.

This. And BE did not receive glowing praise from the judge

[Richard-G]

From the thread 'Ecclestones in trouble then...'

http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Richard-G said:

I can't wait to see how much money Bernie makes out of this!

he'll find a way.

[Derek Smith]

Difficult to depend on such a brief report of the judge's decision but it would appear that Ecclestone might well struggle to reach the level required for fit and proper person.

He won't go to jail, I think that's a given. I'm not even sure it will reach a trial. There could well be a negotiation beforehand. If he thinks that his dirty linen will be aired then a concession early on might be the best bet for him.

Just to reinforce wht others have said, Ecclestone did not win this. He's suffered damaged.

[Derek Smith]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2563731/Ju...

Is anyone running a book on which country Ecclestone might be planning to run off too?

[anonymous-user]

London424 said:

Now I'm no lawyer but the way I read this could have some interesting consequences for his criminal trial.

So although he has "won" and is not liable for any financial payment the judge has put these statements on record

"The payments were a bribe. They were made because Mr Ecclestone had entered into a corrupt agreement with Dr Gribkowsky on May 2005 under which Dr Gribkowsky was to be rewarded for facilitating the sale of BLB's shares in the F1 Group to a buyer acceptable to Mr Ecclestone.

"Mr Ecclestone's aim was to be rid of the banks. He was strongly averse to their involvement in the F1 Group and was keen that their shares should be transferred to someone more congenial to him."

The judge also said: "Even... making allowances for the lapse of time and Mr Ecclestone's age, I am afraid that I find it impossible to regard him as a reliable or truthful witness."

The trial in April will be very interesting...and that one carries jail time!

Well if this judge judged that it was a bribe and corrupt, and therefore illegal, surely a German one should do too?

Fingers crossed.

[Derek Smith]

REALIST123 said:

Well if this judge judged that it was a bribe and corrupt, and therefore illegal, surely a German one should do too?

Fingers crossed.

I shouldn't worry about that side of it. It will only be money as there's no way they'd imprison an 85-year-old. We might have enough to get his influence on the sport reduced to a level where he is of no consequence. I would assume that, after the judge's comments after this trial, he can't be seen as a factor before any floatation. With words like 'corrupt' floating in the air, I reckon even with his connections he'll find it difficult to come back from this one.

With his comments on gays, I would not be surprised to find that he's given up any hope of influence on F1.

[Steffan]

Lincsblokey said:

But the judge also says

'Mr Ecclestone cannot be seen as a truthful or reliable witness'

In common with many successful businessmen I have met during 50 years in Accountancy Bernie Ecclestone is an exceptionally effective business creator and driving force. A significant number have been somewhat economical with the truth. Just a question of how far one is prepared to go for success. I always avoided going beyond the point I believed was reasonable. I always thought BE would win this case and interestingly the judge ruled no loss in the end. I would suggest the accusers were foolish in underestimating BE and overestimating the strength of their case.

[Derek Smith]

Steffan said:

In common with many successful businessmen I have met during 50 years in Accountancy Bernie Ecclestone is an exceptionally effective business creator and driving force. A significant number have been somewhat economical with the truth. Just a question of how far one is prepared to go for success. I always avoided going beyond the point I believed was reasonable. I always thought BE would win this case and interestingly the judge ruled no loss in the end. I would suggest the accusers were foolish in underestimating BE and overestimating the strength of their case.

The word corrupt was used. Would you say that included many successful businessmen?

Ecclestone an effective business creator? I'd suggest he's more of an effective income creator for himself. Perhpas that is what passes for a successful businessman nowadays. He bought something for peanuts. One wonders why the seller, who may or may not have had the right to sell the items, did not ask for a much higher price, something more reflecting its value.

Some people might read into the fact that he does business with the likes of Gribkowsky, in a manner that the judge called corrupt, the manner of his business dealings. Some, apparently, do not.

I'm not jealous of his riches, nor his lifestyle, and certainly not his domestic life. All I want is him out of F1, and hopefully, after his dealings being branded as corrupt, we are well on the way to getting that. But too late I fear.

[Steffan]

Derek Smith said:

Steffan said:

In common with many successful businessmen I have met during 50 years in Accountancy Bernie Ecclestone is an exceptionally effective business creator and driving force. A significant number have been somewhat economical with the truth. Just a question of how far one is prepared to go for success. I always avoided going beyond the point I believed was reasonable. I always thought BE would win this case and interestingly the judge ruled no loss in the end. I would suggest the accusers were foolish in underestimating BE and overestimating the strength of their case.

The word corrupt was used. Would you say that included many successful businessmen?

Ecclestone an effective business creator? I'd suggest he's more of an effective income creator for himself. Perhpas that is what passes for a successful businessman nowadays. He bought something for peanuts. One wonders why the seller, who may or may not have had the right to sell the items, did not ask for a much higher price, something more reflecting its value.

Some people might read into the fact that he does business with the likes of Gribkowsky, in a manner that the judge called corrupt, the manner of his business dealings. Some, apparently, do not.

I'm not jealous of his riches, nor his lifestyle, and certainly not his domestic life. All I want is him out of F1, and hopefully, after his dealings being branded as corrupt, we are well on the way to getting that. But too late I fear.

I am no fan of Ecclestone nor do I enjoy his F1 circus nowadays. I have always avoided corrupt individuals personally because I am too fat to hide behind lampposts and cannot be bothered with the nonsense such activities invite. There are a number of businessmen I have met who were economical with the truth but did not deliberately lie. It would be difficult not to come across some of these in business just as only ever dealing with honest politicians is also difficult if not downright impossible.

Would I choose to deal with them no. Have I almost certainly done so unwittingly, very probably. That is the reality of business in the UK (and politics) sadly today I fear.

[Derek Smith]

Steffan said:

I am no fan of Ecclestone nor do I enjoy his F1 circus nowadays. I have always avoided corrupt individuals personally because I am too fat to hide behind lampposts and cannot be bothered with the nonsense such activities invite. There are a number of businessmen I have met who were economical with the truth but did not deliberately lie. It would be difficult not to come across some of these in business just as only ever dealing with honest politicians is also difficult if not downright impossible.

Would I choose to deal with them no. Have I almost certainly done so unwittingly, very probably. That is the reality of business in the UK (and politics) sadly today I fear.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that you associated with corrupt businessmen or businesswomen. I hope I didn't give that impression.

I used to work in a police force where a significant minority of the officers were corrupt, accepting weekly envelopes containing multiples of £35. It was no time before they went from that to being complicit in a payroll robbery where one person was deliberately shot.

I always think of corruption as being a bit like a pregnancy: you can't be a little bit pregnant.

[Steffan]

Derek Smith said:

Steffan said:

I am no fan of Ecclestone nor do I enjoy his F1 circus nowadays. I have always avoided corrupt individuals personally because I am too fat to hide behind lampposts and cannot be bothered with the nonsense such activities invite. There are a number of businessmen I have met who were economical with the truth but did not deliberately lie. It would be difficult not to come across some of these in business just as only ever dealing with honest politicians is also difficult if not downright impossible.

Would I choose to deal with them no. Have I almost certainly done so unwittingly, very probably. That is the reality of business in the UK (and politics) sadly today I fear.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that you associated with corrupt businessmen or businesswomen. I hope I didn't give that impression.

I used to work in a police force where a significant minority of the officers were corrupt, accepting weekly envelopes containing multiples of £35. It was no time before they went from that to being complicit in a payroll robbery where one person was deliberately shot.

I always think of corruption as being a bit like a pregnancy: you can't be a little bit pregnant.

No offence was taken. Whilst I appreciate your "corruption as being a bit like a pregnancy: you can't be a little bit pregnant.", line how would you deal with a politician who is not corrupt. Indeed could you find one? Does such an individual exist in modern politics?

I frequently audited companies which were subsidiaries of global holding companies. The global activities of the holding companies formed no part of the audit. Subsequent experience made me realise that deliberate profit placing had taken place effectively diminishing the taxation paid massively by the holding company. None of this was apparent in the company I was involved in appeared totally correct.

However some years later I realised what overall had probably been occurring. I cannot see how any professional can protect themselves from such activities other than by not taking on such work. Business today is very very margin aware and profit orientated. I cannot see how one could avoid dealing with businesses who are rather too sharp because such businesses never admit or publicise their approach. In the end I suspect it depends on what you mean by dealing with corruption? Knowingly, no. Unknowingly almost inevitably.

[cerbera2002]

Derek please get some professional help, you may have spent most of your life deciding who was right and wrong on a street corner, but you are so out of your league when it comes business, f1 and real life. Please get over the fact you never actually achieved anything of any importance in your life and let the ones that have breath. When Bernie packs his bag, through choice, the courts or the inevitable, f1 will be a shadow of it current and past form.

[Derek Smith]

cerbera2002 said:

Derek please get some professional help, you may have spent most of your life deciding who was right and wrong on a street corner, but you are so out of your league when it comes business, f1 and real life. Please get over the fact you never actually achieved anything of any importance in your life and let the ones that have breath. When Bernie packs his bag, through choice, the courts or the inevitable, f1 will be a shadow of it current and past form.

Thank you for your comments. I feel certain that you must have taken a great deal of time and trouble over them.

Ecclestone has taken from F1, of that there can be no argument. He has been a leach.

He is, according to a judge, involved in corrupt dealings. That, to me, is not an achievement. Are you suggesting such behaviour is good for the sport?

As for choice, he's been forced into this. Despite his billions, he's been outflanked. CVC has been unable to float because of him, and that might be the legacy that he leaves F1 with. There has been no succession planning. If F1 does start to fail, it won't be because he leaves it but because he ran it selfishly.

Don't you kid yourself that he's superman. He's a greedy, and going by his comments about Hitler and gays, he's nasty as well.

Ecclestone's achievements, as far as F1 is concerned, ended when he left Brabham. Since then it seems to me the main motivating force with him has been greed.

I've followed F1 for some weeks now and the professionalism in F1 preceded his taking control of the rights. It was Frank Williams/Patrick Head/Ron Dennis - don't forget McL's 'Business of Winning' - that pushed F1 forward. Ecclestone was there in the Brabham days but once it started to be business-like he abandoned racing for milking.

As for real life, I'm not sure what you mean. Care to give your view of real life?