2.28pm: While we wait for Sachin to next get a chance to step outside court and update, here is some legal opinion from Quentin Bargate, Senior Partner of the City of London law firm Bargate Murray:
W
hat struck me as most unusual was that the proceedings already taking place before the High Court in London merit only a passing reference in paragraph 53 of the petition...More surprisingly, I can find no reference in the Temporary Restraining Order made by the court in Dallas to the "British Court" decision at all. The court asserts it has jurisdiction without, it would seem, considering the possible impact of its order upon the already extant proceedings in London and whether the Dallas court should accordingly decline jurisdiction in favour of the High Court proceedings – where Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett may well have raised similar points already.
In short, it would appear that Mr Hicks and Mr Gillett's legal team decided against the option of seeking permission to appeal from the Court of Appeal, or decided that process would not yield a result in time and instead have attempted to take a second bite at the cherry in a different jurisdiction. Clearly, the Dallas court agrees that they were entitled to do so, at least for the time being.
So in essence, we have two diametrically opposing decisions of superior courts in England and the US based on essentially the same subject matter. It will be interesting to see what the High Court in London makes of all this...
Let's hope we find out soon...
