View Single Post
Old
09-19-2004, 11:16 AM
  #9
GabbyDugan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdoak
First off, the buisnesses are not 'freeloading', they are paying premium property fees/rent which in turn go helping the NHL team build new arenas. Overall, you have missed the entire point. The point is not to start sucking money from the owners or the players union. The point is to apply enough pressure to force the NHL and the NHLPA to either go to an arbitrator or get this settled quickly.
I have not missed the point, I simply do not buy into taking this course of action. The purpose of your lawsuit is to get outside parties to take legal action influencing the NHL and NHLPA to negotiate under terms that take the interests of outside parties into consideration.

I own my own business, and one of the realities and risks is that my customers, suppliers, competitors, governments, and non-related businesses in my locality may take actions that benefit or harm my business. If they take actions that are clearly in violation of the law, then I'll be on the phone and speed dial my lawyer and seek remedies.

In this case, the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NHL and NHLPA has been terminated by one party in a manner that is completely legal under the laws of Canada and the United States. It seems to have been done in a rather sloppy, shoddy, and somewhat angry manner - but a perfectly legal manner, nevertheless.

Paying premium property fees/rent which in turn go to helping the NHL team build new arenas? Even if they are, almost every lease, property purchase agreement, business license, or other commercial contract has attachments, clauses, and so on specifying that third parties are not entitled to any benefits, claims, or damages from the said contract.

GabbyDugan is offline