Franks letters to the BBBoC

my cinema does a great trade in snuff movies.

Snuffy sundays is 2 for 1

 

Wot real ones

 

Any news on the boards reply had until today.if not wazza was going to court.

 

No one is asking them to "sanction the contest".

Let's assume that this is all correct.

It doesn't seem to (clearly) address the issue:

"If they tell Chisora he is free to do something, and he then does it, is it really good behaviour on the part of the BBBofC if they then start bullying and threatening people?"

The BBBofC could just not make an issue out of it yes? The BBBofC didn't have to make any threats here? They could just allow other people to participate yes?

They could just say: "We wouldn't have given him a license so soon, but another organization has done so; Chisora was free to take that path"

Is that not better than threatening people and starting a fight?

 

What you state is correct. The Board could do all of these things and more. In setting out the law and the Boards legitimate powers, if it chooses to use them, I am not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with what the Board chooses to do. I am merely stating the facts and the law when others make silly comments, such as restraint of trade and constructive dismissal.

The Board may choose not to do anything, they may take action against the organisers and main movers only, they may remove the licences of anyone who takes part. Are any of these things morally right or wrong? That is a matter of individual opinion. However, do they have the right and legal authority to do these things? The answer is yes.

The object of my posts were to stop people thinking that there were Causes of Action open to any dissaffected party when at law there clearly is not. This does not help those license holders who are considering taking part in this event to make a balanced judgement as to whether or not to participate.

For example. Someone reading on the forum that if the Board takes a particular action they can sue them for constructive dismissal will be very upset when having taken part and lost their licence they are reliably informed by a properly qualified legal advisor that they can do no such thing.

I am seeking to state the true situation at law and not take sides. Naturally I have my own views but, apart from expressing my personal opinion that this type of confrontationally action taken and initiated by Bunny is, or potentially could be, bad for the future of boxing in this country I have not sided with either Bunny or the Board.

I am particularly concerned when I read the post further down the page entiled "Letter from PBPA (Bruce Baker, Chairman Professional Boxing Promoters Association Representatives Federation Luxembourgeoise de Boxe) to BBBoC, as to whether or not an attempt to take over control of boxing in this country has been planned by some people for at least a year. God forbid that boxing is run by a body made up of and controlled by Promoters like Bunny. I wouldn't want to be a boxer licensed by such an organisation, promoters and managers already own boxers body and soul as it is and with a controlling body run by them what chance has the boxer got in any dispute?

I accept what you say as fair comment but it is for Bunny and the Board to sort this mess out.