Andre's "suffering"

1221222224226227302

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As JA part in the case is the affidavit then surely that would be removed if jAfort of the case was?

    The case isn't contesting JA's affidavit, it's to sue her for breach of privacy.
    "Price insists that Asmar was a trusted confidante who acted in gross breach of trust. She is seeking substantial damages".

    Read more: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a444882/katie-price-lawsuit-against-former-friend-to-go-ahead.html#ixzz2VNpwJrJ8
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Fizgig wrote: »
    The case isn't contesting JA's affidavit, it's to sue her for breach of privacy.
    "Price insists that Asmar was a trusted confidante who acted in gross breach of trust. She is seeking substantial damages".

    Read more: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a444882/katie-price-lawsuit-against-former-friend-to-go-ahead.html#ixzz2VNpwJrJ8

    Surely the affidavit is the breach of trust Katie is suing her for ..
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Surely the affidavit is the breach of trust Katie is suing her for ..

    They are totally separate things! It's the suing that Asmar queried, that's the issue, not the affidavit! Asmar was contesting KP's right to sue her for breach of trust, based on her notoriously loose lipped history.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Surely the affidavit is the breach of trust Katie is suing her for ..

    The fact that she was going to sell the story, breaching KP's privacy. But JA hasn't withdrawn her affidavit, which is what you said she'd done.
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Fizgig wrote: »
    The fact that she was going to sell the story, breaching KP's privacy. But JA hasn't withdrawn her affidavit, which is what you said she'd done.

    No I never I said she attempted to get it withdrawn from the case ... Not that she had withdrawn it ..which would mean she had changed her mind about what she had written/ signed ..that's a totally different thing
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Fizgig wrote: »
    The fact that she was going to sell the story, breaching KP's privacy. But JA hasn't withdrawn her affidavit, which is what you said she'd done.

    Wasn't it CP who was attempting to sell the affidavit the the New Of The World ..not JA? Although I believe she met with a journo to confirm what she had said in it .. At a later date
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    No I never I said she attempted to get it withdrawn from the case ... Not that she had withdrawn it ..which would mean she had changed her mind about what she had written/ signed ..that's a totally different thing

    Nope, that's not correct. What she was contesting was KP's right to sue her.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I believe the person who made the said affidavit tried to get it removed from the court case...why I wonder.. There is a lot going on that we don't know about and I'm not so sure we ever will.
    I agree we are going round in circles because basically we have nothing really to go on ..
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Nope, that's not correct. What she was contesting was KP's right to sue her.

    ^ This.
    On the selling the story issue, I don't know about CP but I did read that 2 of KP's friends tried to sell it years ago, & KP brought it to the attention of the press herself in a mag interview according to this. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/katie-price-denies-abortion-rumours/551897/
  • Nicola32Nicola32 Posts: 5,153
    Forum Member
    Just had a read on the coffee shop website..and from what I read it's not peters shops ..all the brothers own it..is that right?


    Peter owns them, his brothers run them for him.

    On his last show Junior was asking him about the coffee shops and Pete said that when he dies the shops will belong to him and Princess.

    If Junior and Princess are going to inherit them when Pete dies then he must own them.
  • ee-ayee-ay Posts: 3,963
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nicola32 wrote: »
    Peter owns them, his brothers run them for him.

    On his last show Junior was asking him about the coffee shops and Pete said that when he dies the shops will belong to him and Princess.

    If Junior and Princess are going to inherit them when Pete dies then he must own them.

    I wonder why Peter isn't a named director of New York Coffee Club Ltd? His brother Dan is.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,596
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Not quite.:D

    The Fat Controller is my guess.:D


    Lol hi! :D

    I knew i would see you around sometime in PA threads again :D
  • Nicola32Nicola32 Posts: 5,153
    Forum Member
    I wonder why Peter isn't a named director of New York Coffee Club Ltd? His brother Dan is.


    The owner of a company isn't always a director.
    I have worked for companies where there have been appointed managing directors.

    And like I said why would Junior and Princess inherit the shops when PA dies unless he owned them?
  • ee-ayee-ay Posts: 3,963
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nicola32 wrote: »
    The owner of a company isn't always a director.
    I have worked for companies where there have been appointed managing directors.

    And like I said why would Junior and Princess inherit the shops when PA dies unless he owned them?

    Nicola, Peter isn't even a director of his own clothing range.His clothes are operated by Dolly Diamonds Ltd. Directors Claire Powell & Amy Childs.
  • ee-ayee-ay Posts: 3,963
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nicola32 wrote: »
    The owner of a company isn't always a director.
    I have worked for companies where there have been appointed managing directors.

    And like I said why would Junior and Princess inherit the shops when PA dies unless he owned them?

    The ownership of a company is owned by the shareholders.

    What is the difference between shareholders and directors?

    The directors are responsible for the day to day running of the company and ensuring it meets its responsibilities and
    deadlines. The shareholders own the company and have the right to vote on many issues. The extent of ownership and level of voting rights are based on the percentage of issued shares they own. An individual can be both a director and shareholder of a company.




    New York Coffee Club Limited is run by 1 current member. 1 shareholder own the total shares within the company. It is not part of a group. Daniel Andrea owns the company.
  • Nicola32Nicola32 Posts: 5,153
    Forum Member
    The ownership of a company is owned by the shareholders.

    What is the difference between shareholders and directors?

    The directors are responsible for the day to day running of the company and ensuring it meets its responsibilities and
    deadlines. The shareholders own the company and have the right to vote on many issues. The extent of ownership and level of voting rights are based on the percentage of issued shares they own. An individual can be both a director and shareholder of a company.




    New York Coffee Club Limited is run by 1 current member. 1 shareholder own the total shares within the company. It is not part of a group. Daniel Andrea owns the company.


    Company Director.


    According to The Companies Act every company must have at least one director. The members(shareholders)of the company decide who are to be the directors. It is often the case in small/new businesses that the directors are the shareholders but this is not a legal requirement.
    Generally it is up to the shareholders to appoint the people they believe will run the company well on their behalf.




    As it is not a legal requirement that you have to be a shareholder to be a director how do we know that Danny actually is a shareholder? Does it actually state that he is a shareholder and a director, or just a director?

    I remember when the first shop opened Pete saying that he bought the shop but Danny would be running the business for him.

    If Danny, as you have stated as fact owns the shops...why, when PA talks about them does he always refer to them as "My coffee shops"? Why does every link that comes up when you google NYCC refer to them as "Peter Andre's coffee shops?

    And...as I previously asked why would he be telling Junior and Princess that they will inherit the shops when he dies..if he has no claim to them?:confused:
  • lozengerlozenger Posts: 4,881
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nicola, Peter isn't even a director of his own clothing range.His clothes are operated by Dolly Diamonds Ltd. Directors Claire Powell & Amy Childs.

    Aha - Diamond Doll, we've caught you..>!!:D

    So you've just been pretending to mock PA to throw us off the scent when all along you secretly Direct his clothing range...
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    lozenger wrote: »
    Aha - Diamond Doll, we've caught you..>!!:D

    So you've just been pretending to mock PA to throw us off the scent when all along you secretly Direct his clothing range...

    Ooooh no ..you have blown Diamond Dolls cover :eek:
    How long till my cover is blown ;)
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Nicola 32
    On the coffee shop blurb there is a section titled
    How we started
    And it's written by Danny ( I'm assuming) in which he says the brothers wanted to start a coffee shop and then goes on to describe how michael came up with the name and Peter the idea for a play area (loves his kids) ..so from that I assumed they all owned it ..but it looks like only one does so I think what you have said could be right and Peter owns and Danny runs it
  • DiamondDollDiamondDoll Posts: 21,460
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SCDchick wrote: »
    Lol hi! :D

    I knew i would see you around sometime in PA threads again :D

    Laughing at Peteybabes is my guilty pleasure.:o
  • DiamondDollDiamondDoll Posts: 21,460
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lozenger wrote: »
    Aha - Diamond Doll, we've caught you..>!!:D

    So you've just been pretending to mock PA to throw us off the scent when all along you secretly Direct his clothing range...
    Ooooh no ..you have blown Diamond Dolls cover :eek:
    How long till my cover is blown ;)

    What CAN I say?:o:o:o:o

    Worry not BB.
    I promise your guilty secret will never be revealed by me.;)
  • Ella71110Ella71110 Posts: 4,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The fat controller is far to busy with Thomas the Tank these days :D

    that made me laugh out loud Betty thanks for that! :D
  • DiamondDollDiamondDoll Posts: 21,460
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ella71110 wrote: »
    that made me laugh out loud Betty thanks for that! :D

    It was good and even better when you know the rhyming slang for Tommy Tank.:o
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What CAN I say?:o:o:o:o

    Worry not BB.
    I promise your guilty secret will never be revealed by me.;)

    Thank you DD ...
  • Ella71110Ella71110 Posts: 4,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It was good and even better when you know the rhyming slang for Tommy Tank.:o

    :eek::D

    i was laughing at the thought of Drew (CPs other half) being called Tommy Tank :D

    Ps good morning DD normal services will be resumed from me ive been feeling so ill with a heavy cold but have spent this morning laughing at yours and Bettys interactions on here xx speak later on the abomination that is Petey :)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,114
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Having watched their stateside show..this wasn't a case of him getting up and deciding to leave .. They were not happy for a while and it showed.. I don't believe she had an affair nor do I think she told him she was..or we would know by now .. Both sides couldn't keep an affair secret and it would of benefited peters side when they split to let everyone know she had been messing about .lif she had...

    I agree with you Betty.
This discussion has been closed.