By Lalit K. Modi - 22nd February, 2012
Following the news that ECB Chairman, Giles Clarke has settled a libel case brought by global sports management firm, IMG in London, I've received many messages from people wanting to know if that means the identical case I brought against him has been settled too.
The simple answer is: "no."
IMG and I simultaneously sued for libel after Mr Clarke sent an e-mail to the BCCI claiming that a meeting involving me, IMG and English County representatives, had been arranged to privately discuss a new T20 tournament in England and was therefore against ICC rules.
So I was interested to see today that the ECB's statement confirming settlement with IMG. The statement confirmed that Mr. Clarke had accepted IMG had done nothing wrong. The statement said: "This statement confirms that Mr Clarke accepts that IMG did not act in breach of ICC rules and intended to act within the official structures of world cricket."
My involvement in that very same meeting has yet to induce any such acceptance from Mr. Clarke and so consequently, my action remains in place.
Following the news that ECB Chairman, Giles Clarke has settled a libel case brought by global sports management firm, IMG in London, I've received many messages from people wanting to know if that means the identical case I brought against him has been settled too.
The simple answer is: "no."
IMG and I simultaneously filed for libel after Mr. Clarke sent an e-mail to the BCCI claiming that a meeting involving me, IMG and English County representatives, had been arranged to privately discuss a new T20 tournament in England and was therefore against ICC rules.
So I was interested to see today the ECB's statement confirming settlement with IMG. The statement confirmed that Mr. Clarke had accepted that IMG had done nothing wrong. The statement said: "This statement confirms that Mr. Clarke accepts that IMG did not act in breach of ICC rules and intended to act within the official structures of world cricket."
My involvement in the same meeting has yet to induce any such acceptance from Mr. Clarke and so consequently, my action remains in place.
