Lawsuit: In Session Bardiya_King v. Reveille FC [2024] FCR 82

@Gertis has 24 Hours to answer the questions or be held in contempt.
 
@Gertis is hereby held in contempt and ordered to answer the questions.
 
Your honor, it has been over a week. The plaintiff requests that we continue.
 
We will now be moving into closing statements, plaintiff as 72 Hours to submit
 
CLOSING STATEMENT

Your Honor,

We are here today because the defendant failed to honor the sale of the club to the plaintiff. It has been clearly established during the testimonials that the club was sold to the plaintiff during a Discord call. The evidence also shows that no in-game company with the same name existed during the sale of the club, further validating the plaintiff's claim. The defense’s sole argument is that the plaintiff has no grounds because, as they claim, "the Defendant owns Reveille FC" which is untrue. As we have already proven, the defendant did not retain ownership; the club was sold.

At this point, it is the defense that lacks any valid grounds for their claim. Additionally, this case has been ongoing for almost three months, and the plaintiff still does not have rightful ownership of the club. This delay has caused significant inconvenience, and the plaintiff deserves to be properly compensated for it.

We respectfully ask that you consider these points when reaching your verdict.

Thank you, Your Honor.
 
Your honor, it has been over a week. May we continue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top