 Poster: A snowHead
|
@Gerry, settlements by their very nature involve the dropping of a case. The quoted statements are obviously not incorrect, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that they are incomplete. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| According to statements quoted on planetski, Butler dropped his case against BASI. There is no mention of an out-of-court settlement... |
As it was Butler who brought the case against BASI only he is in a position to drop the case before the Court makes a judgement. Obviously BASI is not able to unilaterally drop the case.
It might be that Butler decided just to walk away in the light of the recent judgement in the French Administrative Court, deciding it was better to bring the stress from all the legal action to an immediate end? Or it might be that Butler's lawyers and BASI's lawyers/insurers spent some time over the weekend agreeing a deal which Butler was happy with and included settling the matter out of court? It seems to me that out of court settlements are often accompanied by non-disclosure agreements on both parties, so maybe we will never know how this is resolved (although it will be a matter of public record whether Butler's membership of BASI continues, and whether he has been issued with an MoU stamp).*
* I am in no way a lawyer so all this might be complete tosh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@rob@rar,
| Quote: |
it might be that Butler's lawyers and BASI's lawyers/insurers spent some time over the weekend agreeing a deal which Butler was happy with and included settling the matter out of court? It seems to me that out of court settlements are often accompanied by non-disclosure agreements on both parties
|
Exactly. Not tosh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
"According to statements quoted on planetski, Butler dropped his case against BASI. There is no mention of an out-of-court settlement..."
Nor does it say there was not a settlement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@dogwatch, exactly. Again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Presumably this has ramifications for any instructor in similar circumstances and rather weakens the ESF position...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
| @Gerry, settlements by their very nature involve the dropping of a case. The quoted statements are obviously not incorrect, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that they are incomplete. |
| Quote: |
| "In coming to this decision, amongst many other factors, Simon was aware that large sums of BASI members' money were potentially at risk, but given the entire point of both court actions was to allow him to work on the slopes, this has now been achieved and there is no purpose to be served in continuing to pursue matters." |
Seems clear enough to me.
*I have a DVD box set of Crown Court episodes from the iconic 70s legal drama series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Gerry,
| Quote: |
Seems clear enough to me
|
jolly good
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
I find it rather disappointing after all this time that we aren't going to get to see key individuals in BASI eat humble pie - I'd be rather keen to see any of the supergrass squad and those who took any role in the drumming out including Don "Master" Bates explain their actions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| According to statements quoted on planetski, Butler dropped his case against BASI. There is no mention of an out-of-court settlement |
Well, not in the artice perhaps, but the Facebook post that @Hells Bells quoted and the statement on Simon Butlers website (http://www.sbski.com/about-us/latest-news/#mainnews1) says this [emphasis mine]
| Quote: |
The first action against BASI to restore him to membership after he was unlawfully expelled was concluded in his favour, and in settling the current Scottish case, Simon hopes this will bring an end to the years of upset, rancour and distress this entire episode has caused to everyone concerned. |
This is either a very careless use of words or there really was a settlement [possibly both!]
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I find the dropping of case puzzling unless SB has got a cash settlement and agreement that he'll get his MOU stamp. The case in France is not guaranteed to be over as a page or so ago it was said there are still routes for an appeal. If SB has dropped the case against BASI and there is a successful appeal of the Administrative Court judgement, where would that leave him? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Gaza wrote: |
| If SB has dropped the case against BASI and there is a successful appeal of the Administrative Court judgement, where would that leave him? |
Nobody knows whether he simply walked away from the case, or has reached an agreement with BASI on various matters. If, for example, the agreement between Butler and BASI included his reinstatement as a full member and an acknowledgment that he was entitled to an MoU that would satisfy the main reason he brought the case in the first place, so he might then have been happy to drop proceedings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would have thought that it almost inevitable that there's been some sort of settlement - why wouldn't there be? Settlement would probably suit both parties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@dobby, obviously we're all speculating - apart from Gerry, who apparently knows the facts - but I agree with you. It is also in the nature of settlements that they suit both parties (to some extent).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@dobby, The settlement of a case may involve some sort of settlement, the confidentiality of which may involve agreement not to disclose that *any* payment was made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
`Settlement` covers a range of possibilities.
It might mean one side agreeing to pay the other monetary compensation (this might be a disclosed sum or an undisclosed sum).
It could mean the claimant agreeing not to pursue a matter on the basis that the deft agrees to do some act in return e.g. reinstate him/her in some capacity.
Settlement also embraces a claimant who agrees to discontinue on the basis that each side bears its own costs. This is a fairly common scenario.
`Settlement` does not necessarily imply the handing over of money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
While it may be the "business" of BASI's membership to ask what costs were incurred and expended, I dont think it is our business to speculate, there is a whole range of possible alternatives and we should probably just put it to bed from the outsiders perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
@FFIRMIN, some of the contributors to this thread are BASI members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| FFIRMIN wrote: |
| While it may be the "business" of BASI's membership to ask what costs were incurred and expended, I dont think it is our business to speculate, there is a whole range of possible alternatives and we should probably just put it to bed from the outsiders perspective. |
Why not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
As I said it is for the BASI members through their membership to explore the financial consequences of this disaster and there are undoubtedly appropriate channels through which they may do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
I could add, that since there are BASI members on here they might wish to explore the consequences through their own channels but may also by reason of that membership be bound by any obligations of confidentiality, it is their association and their association has obviously committed them to some sort of negotiated agreement which may be binding upon individual members. If I were a BASI member and I wanted to know the details and how I could find out and what my obligations might be once in possession of that information I would be reviewing the Articles of Association and general membership conditions of membership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean "settlement" as in cessation of legal disputes. Wouldn't be surprised if there's some financial arrangement, if only to cover legal fees or part thereof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Simon Butler and The British Association of Snowsport Instructors have reached an out-of-court settlement, leading to the end of the court action brought by Mr Butler against BASI.
Under the terms of the settlement, Mr Butler has abandoned his court action against BASI with both sides agreeing to pay their own legal costs. Mr Butler has also given several undertakings to the Court:
That Mr Butler will not ever raise any claims or proceedings of whatever nature against BASI seeking to challenge (i) the decision of February 2014 not to grant Mr Butler his MoU stamp and the decision of November 2014 to remove Mr Butler as a member of BASI, (ii) the decision of 1 November 2016 not to grant Mr Butler his MoU stamp, and (iii) the reasoning of BASI in making the 1 November 2016 decision; and
That Mr Butler will not ever raise any claims or proceedings of whatever nature against BASI seeking damages from BASI in relation to any of the above decisions.
For the avoidance of doubt, this settlement did not involve Mr Butler being granted an MoU stamp.
Settlement came after two days of hearings at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. At the first of these hearings on Thursday 24 November Mr Butler’s Counsel sought to discharge the evidential hearing set down for Tuesday 29 November, asking for time to consider the recent decision of the Lyon administrative court. The Court refused this. This request was repeated at a second hearing on Friday 25 November and was again refused. The Court then heard argument from both parties and refused to allow Mr Butler to introduce additional challenges in relation to a new decision to refuse his MoU stamp of 1 November 2016, advising that it is unlikely a case brought on these grounds would receive permission to proceed.
Subsequent to this hearing the parties continued with settlement discussion which had been opened by BASI on Tuesday 22 November. An agreement was reached on Friday afternoon and the court action was formally refused on Tuesday 29 November, bringing the action to an end. While BASI is saddened that it has been forced to enter into court proceedings against one of its own members, it is happy that in this case an agreement to the benefit of both parties has been reached without further cost needing to be incurred by either party. While BASI maintains that its position was correct and was fully committed to defending the action to its conclusion, it is hoped that this agreement will draw a line in this issue.
A fuller statement will be issued to members in due course. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
OK now - I'm completely lost - BASI paid him go away money but maintain they would have won (usual BS detector there but perhaps its out of their hands & in the hands of their insurer) but refuse to ever grant him a MoU stamp or even membership. I'm guessing he has another body more than willing to accept him in order to take that deal unless he feels confident that he is protected forevermore by the French Admin Court decision.
BASI definitely don't come out of this smelling good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wonder if SB will release a statement saying what BASI has undertaken (if anything)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, does teh French Admin court decision work like many other French legal decisions - i.e. it holds until a different case and a different court decide differently?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| ..... or even membership. |
I don't think it is saying that. I think it is saying that he won't challenge the decision and seek compo for the decision. BASI had already admitted they were wrong to remove his membership and have reinstated it.
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| I'm guessing he has another body more than willing to accept him in order to take that deal unless he feels confident that he is protected forevermore by the French Admin Court decision. |
Probably ISIA. Quite a few people have already jumped ship to the Irish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| @Dave of the Marmottes, does teh French Admin court decision work like many other French legal decisions - i.e. it holds until a different case and a different court decide differently? |
It holds until a higher court decides differently, up to the supreme court. It is a first instance court so other courts elsewhere might not follow although a lawyer would certainly refer to the decision in Lyon. However given the RhoneAlpes prefecture issues carte pro for the... well RhoneAlpes and it is the court with jurisdiction then it is likely to hold in the region. A court in the Pyrenees or Southern Alps may not follow suit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
So - after 57 pages of wild speculation we have an ending.
No doubt the most enthusiastic advocates from both camps will try and claim moral victory - in all reality it is a score draw.
Simon Butler gets to carry on working in France and BASI gets the case against them dropped.
Exactly as predicted on the 2nd post of this topic the only real winners are the lawyers.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Tue 29-11-16 21:13; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
email sent to basi members this evening.
Simon Butler and The British Association of Snowsport Instructors have reached an out-of-court settlement, leading to the end of the court action brought by Mr Butler against BASI.
Under the terms of the settlement, Mr Butler has abandoned his court action against BASI with both sides agreeing to pay their own legal costs. Mr Butler has also given several undertakings to the Court:
That Mr Butler will not ever raise any claims or proceedings of whatever nature against BASI seeking to challenge (i) the decision of February 2014 not to grant Mr Butler his MoU stamp and the decision of November 2014 to remove Mr Butler as a member of BASI, (ii) the decision of 1 November 2016 not to grant Mr Butler his MoU stamp, and (iii) the reasoning of BASI in making the 1 November 2016 decision; and
That Mr Butler will not ever raise any claims or proceedings of whatever nature against BASI seeking damages from BASI in relation to any of the above decisions.
For the avoidance of doubt, this settlement did not involve Mr Butler being granted an MoU stamp.
Settlement came after two days of hearings at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. At the first of these hearings on Thursday 24 November Mr Butler’s Counsel sought to discharge the evidential hearing set down for Tuesday 29 November, asking for time to consider the recent decision of the Lyon administrative court. The Court refused this. This request was repeated at a second hearing on Friday 25 November and was again refused. The Court then heard argument from both parties and refused to allow Mr Butler to introduce additional challenges in relation to a new decision to refuse his MoU stamp of 1 November 2016, advising that it is unlikely a case brought on these grounds would receive permission to proceed.
Subsequent to this hearing the parties continued with settlement discussion which had been opened by BASI on Tuesday 22 November. An agreement was reached on Friday afternoon and the court action was formally refused on Tuesday 29 November, bringing the action to an end. While BASI is saddened that it has been forced to enter into court proceedings against one of its own members, it is happy that in this case an agreement to the benefit of both parties has been reached without further cost needing to be incurred by either party. While BASI maintains that its position was correct and was fully committed to defending the action to its conclusion, it is hoped that this agreement will draw a line in this issue.
A fuller statement will be issued to members in due course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
So - after 57 pages of wild speculation we have an ending.
No doubt the most enthusiastic advocates from both camps will try and claim moral victory - in all reality it is a score draw.
Simon Butler gets to carry on working in France and BASI gets the case against them dropped.
Exactly as predicted on the 2nd post of this topic the only real winners are the lawyers. |
I agree to an extent. It was a score draw.
But stating the only real winners are the lawyers is, frankly, daft. I do get fed up with cheap, easy and often inaccurate demonisation of `the lawyers`.
SB commenced the claim. SB chose to discontinue. BASI clearly took the same view. Presumably both sides concluded that the risks of pursuing the matter were too great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
It might be that SB feels that in light of the French Court decision the MOU is superfluous. I think that the MOU is a deal with the ESF so they don't complain to the authorities, and not a deal with the French ministry of sport? So he might even feel that applying for a MoU could weaken his victory? As in "look I'm working in France without a MoU, so none needed"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| sugardaddy wrote: |
| It might be that SB feels that in light of the French Court decision the MOU is superfluous. |
Exactly: the French court decision gives SB and _all_ his instructors the right to work in France. The BASI case was just about SB and was an alternative route to establish his own working rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| laundryman wrote: |
| the French court decision gives SB and _all_ his instructors the right to work in France. |
The crux..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
For the avoidance of doubt, this settlement did not involve Mr Butler being granted an MoU stamp.
|
Surely this was one of the main gripes. Can someone explain a bit more why SB seems happy to settle on this basis ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@dsoutar, because very simply there were 2 options for SB to carry on working in France, the obvious one was to have his MOU restored as that would grant him the grandfather rights, but the better option was for the French court to acknowledge that his training via BASI was as good as the French training and that he did not have to do the speed test, this as I under stand things was what the French Courts decided and is much better for SB (and other UK BASI Instructors) since it makes the MOU and the dodgy deal made between BASI and the French Instructors pretty much irrelevant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder how this will affect the ability of a British run school with BASI qualified (but not speed-tested) instructors to take on stagiaires?
And will it have any knock on impact in other EU countries (particularly Italy and Austria).
Be a shame if this door opens just as the Brexit door slams it shut....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Be a shame if this door opens just as the Brexit door slams it shut.... |
It does Pam, but that is the inevitable outcome... for non EU instructors at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
@pam w, I guess it depends what you mean by 'stagiaire'. I guess in general it means 'apprentice' or 'trainee', but in context I think it means a trainee instructor working within the French training system for ski instruction. I would guess very few British-run schools would want to jump through the hoops to do that. But they could employ BASI L2 or L3 instructors while they train to upgrade their BASI qualifications. AIUI, that applies to anyone who's already declared with the correct paperwork, regardless of the fact they will have been turned down (on spurious grounds). I think it remains to be seen whether the administration will seek to demonstrate 'substantial differences' in training for new declarations and how they factor in experience, as they must. My guess would be that this won't be a problem for L3s - until Brexit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| AndAnotherThing.. wrote: |
| laundryman wrote: |
| the French court decision gives SB and _all_ his instructors the right to work in France. |
The crux.. |
Agreed, leading on to...
| pam w wrote: |
| I wonder how this will affect the ability of a British run school with BASI qualified (but not speed-tested) instructors to take on stagiaires? |
I think some or all of SB's instructors had worked longer than the Stagiere grace period, suggesting they've been given more rights than that.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Wed 30-11-16 15:41; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
