FIDE Law Suit

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16126
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:11 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote: Now do we get to see who has signed the dreaded 'White Form' before it is attacked
with an eraser?
The ECF membership list, most recent copy at
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... r-2011.xls
used to tell you.

They aren't downloading that column any more.

At one time they tried to insist that you sign the White Form as a condition of playing in a FIDE rated event. Prior to that, they tried to insist on everyone signing. It created an internal row with the NCCU.

The membership page still says you need to sign the form
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=2
It's behind the times as they voted abolition at the October AGM.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 1751
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Geoff Chandler » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:43 pm

Send a copy of the White Form to FIDE.

They will back down when they see just who they are tangling with.

I bet they don't have a White Form they can threaten us with.

Paul Buswell
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:56 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Paul Buswell » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:28 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Matthew Turner wrote:Is that because all the costs are being borne by the Georgian Chess Federation or there is a backer to cover the ECF's costs?
Either way, I am not sure that it is a good idea to get involved in a court case with the big boys. Whose decision was it? Do council ever have a vote on it?
There's a backer to cover the ECF's costs. It was a decision passed by a majority Board vote.
When was the decision taken please? And, if you know, when did the possibility of taking legal action first come before the Board?

Thank you

PB

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 3350
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:39 pm

It is absolutely astonishing that this was not mentioned at the AGM, I have to say. To have to find out about it from other sources just brings the Board into disrepute.

Of course, by now, the fact that the costs are backed by an anonymous donor barely attracts any comment at all. Anonymous? Of course he is! Anonymous Donor is now every much a pervasive figure in British chess as D Fault and No Suitable Candidate.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5509
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Carl Hibbard » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:45 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote:It is absolutely astonishing that this was not mentioned at the AGM, I have to say. To have to find out about it from other sources just brings the Board into disrepute.
How can this one not have been mentioned before, we need to get some input from Andrew Farthing on this one to be honest?
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 2119
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:24 am

Thanks to Roger for alerting us to this.

ECF/BCF has always been shy about revealing legal action, although it has normally been on the receiving end of said action. I would have thought it predictable that the membership might have been interested in hearing about this from ECF, rather than from outside sources. After all, it is surely a good idea to reassure the membership about the financial situation in advance, whereas now many members are probably assuming the worst.
"You are unable to use it (forum) without rancour, unable to refrain from raising old grudges and continually bring it to the point where its owner has to remove posts which could be construed as defamatory of public figures." - P McKeown

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1341
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Alex McFarlane » Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:33 am

What effect will this legal action have on ECF finances?

Whilst the ananymous person funding this action may indeed have given the ECF cast iron guarantees (the nature of which should by right be made known to the members), what will the knock-on situation be?

Will the John Robinson Trust be happy about this or will it withdraw its support?

Will potential sponsors look favourably on such action?

I just hope for the ECF's sake that the assurances it has received of backing prove to be more substantial than that received by a recent event where the financial promises of an ECF official were not fulfilled.

Sean Hewitt

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Sean Hewitt » Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:00 am

Alex McFarlane wrote:I just hope for the ECF's sake that the assurances it has received of backing prove to be more substantial than that received by a recent event where the financial promises of an ECF official were not fulfilled.
I hope the guarantees are better than those provided during the Chess for Schools fiasco.

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1341
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Alex McFarlane » Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:32 am

A thought.

Hypothetically speaking, in best Ian Hislop mode, supposing the backer of this legal action is associated with a particular Board member. That Board member comes under a lot of criticism and has to be blindly defended by one or more of the other Board members. However the pressure becomes too much and Board Member 1 is either removed from office or resigns and takes the backer with him. Hypothetically, does the ECF have a manually operated propulsion unit to propel its small waterbased craft through a stream of effluent?

Andrew Wainwright
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Andrew Wainwright » Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:29 am

I find it amazing that given the financial difficulties the ECF currently faces that it would choose to bring legal action of this nature, irrespective of the backing/indemnification/guarantees that have been provided by this unknown individual.

To echo the sentiments of other posters on this thread I hope that a concrete, legally binding and all encompassing agreement has been entered into with the person financing this action.

I understand the role that the ECF has to play in the global arena, but surely our attention should be closer to home given the current difficulties, rather than time and effort being expended on this legal action? I hope that the rationale for bringing the claim is sufficient to justify the time and money involved.

David Robertson
Posts: 1654
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by David Robertson » Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:49 am

I agree.

From what little we know, it doesn't appear to be ECF 'core business'. I can't imagine what has come to pass that requires our volunteer, over-pressed, and not very sure-footed Board to enter litigation with FIDE. What justifies this distraction of time and focus? A couple of extra VPs? Are our interests so compromised by this?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16126
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:51 am

Alex McFarlane wrote:A thought.
Hypothetically speaking, in best Ian Hislop mode, supposing the backer of this legal action is associated with a particular Board member.
One might presume a wealthy individual or individuals with a grudge against FIDE in general or its president in particular. CAS (Court of Arbitration in Sport) ruled in the 2010 Karpov case that only members of FIDE could take legal action on matters that were FIDE internal procedures such as eligibility for elections and presumably appointment of vice-presidents. As only chess federations can become members of FIDE, it follows that such individuals would have to find a chess federation willing to act as their proxy. You can see that the payment of lawyers to prepare and present the case could easily be done without involving the chess federation. The more worrying development would be if FIDE then attempted directly or indirectly to recover its own costs from said federation. This could apply whether the case was won or lost.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8017
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Alex Holowczak » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:08 pm

Alex McFarlane wrote:Will the John Robinson Trust be happy about this or will it withdraw its support?
The ECF's famed legal-eagle is also a JRT trustee. If there were a problem, he would have said so.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16126
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote: The ECF's famed legal-eagle is also a JRT trustee. If there were a problem, he would have said so.
Assuming the JRT Trustees haven't changed recently, one of the other Trustees is someone who some would suspect ( perhaps including Alex McF) of being rather more supportive of the FIDE President than many others in the British chess community.

John Upham
Posts: 4066
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: FIDE Law Suit

Post by John Upham » Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:16 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote: The ECF's famed legal-eagle is also a JRT trustee. If there were a problem, he would have said so.
Alex,

I have surveyed the list of ECF Officials and cannot find anyone named as being an ECF Legal Advisor or similar.

Are you authorised to name the person providing such advice?

If they act on behalf of the ECF is there an excellent reason that he or she are not named as such?

Post Reply