A&H

Port Vale v Portsmouth

It's just like a shop. If the shop say they aren't serving you and ask you to leave you're trespassing and they are under no obligation to allow you entry or service.
 
The Referee Store
I suspect there will be a significant number of people never setting foot in The Hawthorns or Molineux again after the shocking scenes just witnessed there.
 
You are missing the point, it is private property and owners will always have a right to say who they will allow in. No different to being banned for life from a pub or club, and there are loads of examples of it. Gillingham banned a fan for life late last year for racist behaviour, Sheffield Wednesday banned a fan for life for a racist tweet aimed at Darren Moore, and so on.
Yes but this basically says if fan has enough money to challenge court will overturn ban due to this ruling and even private buissness can’t trial people twice.
 
Yes but this basically says if fan has enough money to challenge court will overturn ban due to this ruling and even private buissness can’t trial people twice.
You are so wrong here. That's like saying I could come to your house and demand entry, then take you to court if you refuse to let me in.
 
No I’m saying if I took you to court and you were convicted of breaking and entering couldn’t then sue you separately for it which is the law.
No one is suggesting suing separately

If you go into a pub and the landlord doesn't like the look of you they can refuse you entry without reason.

Further still, if you committed a crime there and the courts barred you for 5 years, it does not mean after 5 years and a day they have to allow you entry, they can continue to bar you for a long as they like, without reason
 
No I’m saying if I took you to court and you were convicted of breaking and entering couldn’t then sue you separately for it which is the law.
That literally makes no sense whatsoever.

You said that a club cannot ban a supporter for life. They can, because doing so isn't extending a football banning order, it is controlling who has access to their premises, something that any premises owner can do. I've given examples of clubs that have publicly done it. Many clubs even reference it in their terms and conditions, for example as in Sheffield Wednesday's reproduced below.

1706467065170.png
 
That literally makes no sense whatsoever.

You said that a club cannot ban a supporter for life. They can, because doing so isn't extending a football banning order, it is controlling who has access to their premises, something that any premises owner can do. I've given examples of clubs that have publicly done it. Many clubs even reference it in their terms and conditions, for example as in Sheffield Wednesday's reproduced below.

View attachment 7098
And any judge is going to quash it per 2014 ruling and probably order clubs to pay legal costs a judge isn’t going to risk his job to help a football club police fans.
 
And any judge is going to quash it per 2014 ruling and probably order clubs to pay legal costs a judge isn’t going to risk his job to help a football club police fans.
You are misinterpreting the 2014 judgement. It talks about extending a ban or prosecuting someone twice for the same offence, but a club banning an individual from their property isn't extending a ban or prosecuting anyone, it is just doing what any property owner is entitled to do. Every football club has an army of legal experts, do you really think they would publish things in their ground regulations that aren't legal?
 
You are missing the point, it is private property and owners will always have a right to say who they will allow in. No different to being banned for life from a pub or club, and there are loads of examples of it. Gillingham banned a fan for life late last year for racist behaviour, Sheffield Wednesday banned a fan for life for a racist tweet aimed at Darren Moore, and so on.
The previous owner of my team banned somebody who spoke out about him. Permanent and no court had been involved.

A football club is a private venue and anybody can be banned regardless.
 
The previous owner of my team banned somebody who spoke out about him. Permanent and no court had been involved.

A football club is a private venue and anybody can be banned regardless.
A previous Sheffield Wednesday owner took it a step further. He issued lifetime bans to a group of supporters and took them to court for libel.
 
You are misinterpreting the 2014 judgement. It talks about extending a ban or prosecuting someone twice for the same offence, but a club banning an individual from their property isn't extending a ban or prosecuting anyone, it is just doing what any property owner is entitled to do. Every football club has an army of legal experts, do you really think they would publish things in their ground regulations that aren't legal?
Yes Stevenage had to alter there’s for doing exactly that as I knew the lawyer who flagged it.
 
Shocking, the person should face the full consequences of the law. He looks like a younger person, possibly on drugs and/or mental health issues.
 
Yes Stevenage had to alter there’s for doing exactly that as I knew the lawyer who flagged it.
Yet most of the Premier League clubs, who all have top lawyers on the payroll, have it in their ground conditions. A very quick and cursory Google search shows that Liverpool, Chelsea, Leeds, Spurs and West Ham have all recently issued lifetime bans to supporters.
 
Yet most of the Premier League clubs, who all have top lawyers on the payroll, have it in their ground conditions. A very quick and cursory Google search shows that Liverpool, Chelsea, Leeds, Spurs and West Ham have all recently issued lifetime bans to supporters.
Yes and FSA got the West Ham one quashed in court in under a hour.
 
Shocking, the person should face the full consequences of the law. He looks like a younger person, possibly on drugs and/or mental health issues.
My goodness, you're good. You can tell all of that from looking at a short video clip?

As for being banned from working with children, if convicted, the person's name and offence will be recorded. It will be regarded as spent after a period of time. Anyone who wants to work with Young People and/or Vulnerable Adults will be subject to a search of the records of the DBS who will provide details of the offence to the person, persons or organisation requesting the search. It will be up to the person, persons or organisation carrying out the search to decide if they wish to allow that person to work with the YP or VA.
 
Yes and FSA got the West Ham one quashed in court in under a hour.
Do you have a source for that? The only such case that I can find was where a West Ham fan had a lifetime ban overturned because it was a case of mistaken identity.

West Ham fan life ban overturned

On Tuesday he got a call back from the club advising him that he’d been banned in error, in a case of mistaken identity.

Subsequent to that incident, West Ham have continued to issue, and promise to issue lifetime bans.

West Ham issue lifetime ban to fan

West Ham have issued a lifetime ban to a fan and also passed on their evidence to the police after he was caught on camera hurling racially offensive abuse at rival fans.

West Ham to issue lifetime bans to fans found guilty of homophobic abuse

West Ham have vowed to dish out lifetime bans to any supporter found guilty of homophobic abuse following two arrests during Saturday's draw with Brighton.
 
And here's another case, from 2022, which clearly shows that while court-imposed banning orders are time-limited and can be overturned, bans imposed by clubs can still be imposed indefinitely.

Albion fan who overturned court football ban not welcome at matches

The spokesman added: "The court may have overturned the banning order ..."

[However]

"The individual remains subject to an indefinite ban, therefore he will not be allowed entry into home matches or have access to any away match tickets."
 
Not sure it’s enforceable when tested what you just showed is clubs act illegally which interesting.
IF it was illegal for a club to ban somebody for life would an individual not have taken the club to court, won (if you're right) and this debate would not even be taking place?

I think a club can ban anybody due to private property etc. Same as a pub, gym etc.

I may be wrong.
 
Back
Top