This is a very interesting response. I suspect that most people on here, like me, don't have the background to understand fully the complexities and the cost of bringing a civil case such as this.
Essentially, as I understand it, there is a part of the civil case which concerns abuse perpetrated at CBC. However, as CBC has no money, there is no point going to court unless an unbreakable link is established between CBC and CFC (who do have money).
There could be another part which involves abuse by a Celtic employee and on Celtic premises. Presumably that one could go ahead assuming there is a victim who so desires and the evidence of corporate wrongdoing is there.
I appreciate that some victims just want their day in court. However, that day can be very expensive and especially when you are up against a well funded corporate opponent. So the money has to come from somewhere and if the victims don't have it then the case cannot go forward.
All of us on here believe that CBC and CFC were inextricably linked. But having that belief and proving the link in court are two different things. CFC obviously believe that they can win an argument that they were not. Lawyer's for the victims will have to move very cautiously, carefully and systematically in order to build a robust case that they were. That takes time.
This is a very interesting response. I suspect that most people on here, like me, don't have the background to understand fully the complexities and the cost of bringing a civil case such as this.
Essentially, as I understand it, there is a part of the civil case which concerns abuse perpetrated at CBC. However, as CBC has no money, there is no point going to court unless an unbreakable link is established between CBC and CFC (who do have money).
There could be another part which involves abuse by a Celtic employee and on Celtic premises. Presumably that one could go ahead assuming there is a victim who so desires and the evidence of corporate wrongdoing is there.
I appreciate that some victims just want their day in court. However, that day can be very expensive and especially when you are up against a well funded corporate opponent. So the money has to come from somewhere and if the victims don't have it then the case cannot go forward.
All of us on here believe that CBC and CFC were inextricably linked. But having that belief and proving the link in court are two different things. CFC obviously believe that they can win an argument that they were not. Lawyer's for the victims will have to move very cautiously, carefully and systematically in order to build a robust case that they were. That takes time.
Hillheadbear; I will PM you later too detail it for you, not for open forum mate.
been up all night watching Boxing & need a snooze.