Filed: Wednesday, 29th June 2011
By: Staff Writer
Tottenham have vowed to continue their fight against the decision to award the Olympic Stadium to West Ham.
Last week the north Londoners saw their application for a judicial review of the decision by the Olympic Park Legacy Committee thrown out of court.
However Tottenham refused to accept defeat, stating on Friday that 'the club now has the option of renewing its application at an oral hearing at the High Court and we shall give consideration to this in the next few days'.
Now having given it their due consideration, Spurs confirmed today that they will indeed be taking their case to the High Court. In a statement posted on tottenhamhotspur.com tonight they said:
"The club [Tottenham] has applied to the High Court to renew its application for permission to bring a claim against the London Borough of Newham and the Olympic Park Legacy Company, the Mayor of London and Government Ministers for judicial review of their decisions underlying the bid process for the conversion of the Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Games.
"Under this process the club now has the opportunity to present its case at an oral hearing at the High Court."
West Ham were confirmed as the OPLC's 'preferred bidder' back in February. That decision was officially ratified by the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, and the Government at the beginning of March.
That same week, Orient Chairman Barry Hearn launched the first campaign against the decision.
However his efforts hit the buffers when the Premier League exposed the hypocrisy of his case (Hearn claimed that a top flight team at the OS would have been detrimental to his club's attendance figures; the League revealed Hearn had previously given his consent to Spurs moving there).
At the end of March, Tottenham - by now openly in cahoots with Hearn - confirmed that they would be seeking a judicial review of the OPLC decision.
However last week's ruling that upheld the OPLC's choice of preferred bidder still doesn't appear to have dampened Daniel Levy's resolve; the case looks set to rumble on.
The KUMB Podcast: Volume 3, Episode 26 [24th Apr 2015]
Carroll, Cresswell, QPR and Allardyce: Thursday's news [23rd Apr 2015]
Brady, Potts, Cresswell and Song: Wednesday's news [22nd Apr 2015]
West Ham United deliver affordable football as season ticket prices are slashed [22nd Apr 2015]
West Ham deny 'state aid' charge [21st Apr 2015]
New OS controversy as 'state aid' questioned [21st Apr 2015]
Klopp, Noble, Kouyate and Roeder: Tuesday's news [21st Apr 2015]
Downing, Sakho, Cole and Jenkinson: Friday's news [10th Apr 2015]
In brief - Friday's news round-up [3rd Apr 2015]
by g portugal
09:01AM 1st Jul 2011
'' This incident explains why Spurs can huff and puff, but they will NEVER break into the top four on a consistent basis. Not with ownership like this who waste time, money and goodwill on rubbish like this. No wonder a player like Modric wants out. Who would want to play for owners who engage in this nonsense as opposed to trying to strengthen their squad?
The Tottenham ownership show no ambition. They act like spoiled children who feel that the world owes them a living.''
01:19PM 30th Jun 2011
''I am wondering if this may end up like the Sheff Utd/Tevez affair, where WHU won several cases and Sheff Utd kept appealing and trying different avenues until they won at the only stage when the loser could not appeal.''
06:19AM 30th Jun 2011
''Sad,sad Spurs. Time to admit defeat.''
by John White
10:03PM 29th Jun 2011
''The reason Barry Hearn argued that West Ham at the OS would affect Orient's attendances whereas Tottenham would not is quite simple: West Ham's directors openly stated that they were going to offer inducements to fans to attend matches in order to have any chance of filling the stadium. Tottenham had no such plans.''
by Lightning Smith
08:21PM 29th Jun 2011
''The last thing Spurs fans want is a move to east London. Even if Tottenham tear it down, Spurs belong in North London.''
08:15PM 29th Jun 2011
''Do you think Levy was bullied as a kid? Doesn't like taking a beating, does he...''
comments powered by Disqus