COVENTRY City Football Club’s owners Sisu is seeking to appeal against a court decision to refuse a judicial review into the council’s Ricoh Arena sale to Wasps in 2014.
The club has confirmed today that its hedge fund owner has applied to the Supreme Court for an appeal against October’s High Court decision, which will now be considered by a panel of judges.
A statement on Coventry City’s website reads: “Coventry City Football Club has learned of the decision of the club owners SISU to appeal the latest court judgement and continue court proceedings against Wasps and Coventry City Council.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the shareholder drives the legal process and instructs legal counsel. The club does not make any decision on the court proceedings nor does it pay any legal costs.
“We reiterate the club’s desire and need to agree a new deal to continue to play matches at the Ricoh Arena.
“We want this deal to happen, as we believe supporters and the wider community do too, and everyone at Coventry City Football Club will work tirelessly in our attempts to make this happen. Without this, our place in the EFL and the club’s future is in jeopardy.”
The current tenancy deal at the Ricoh expires at the end of this season.
Wasps last year extended it by one season, after previously repeatedly stating publicly there would be no such deal unless Sky Blues’ owners dropped the legal action.
Wasps are once again refusing to come to the table to negotiate a deal.
Sky Blues companies had been among those listed as taking the legal action dismissed in October.
A joint statement from Coventry council leader George Duggins and Coun Gary Ridley, opposition leader, says: “We are extremely disappointed that Sisu-related companies have decided to seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, despite already having had their application refused at both the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
“Sisu has continually sought to re-open decisions taken by the Council more than four years ago but we believe we have a strong defence to all the claims and that the decisions the Council took on 7 October 2014 were entirely appropriate and lawful.
“Until the Supreme Court considers the application, we do not intend to make any further comment on the case.”
