Comments Thread For: Letters from Team Rivas Lawyers Might Foretell Lawsuit

[andocom]

"Hearn could not inform Rivas' team of an adverse test result as that was private & confidential".


Where exactly is that written in UKAD's rules? I can only find where it states "publicly reporting" is prohibited not "interested third parties". They seem to allow reporting to interested third parties (Team Rivas) on a confidential basis. Article 14: Confidentiality and Reporting. You are claiming facts and I believe you are mistaken.

Any notice given to Interested Parties and/or other third parties of pending cases pursuant to these Rules shall be provided to them on the confidential basis set out in Code Article 14.1.5.

If Rivas was considered an interested third party under their definition, he would have been notified by UKAD/NADP, the interested third parties in this case I believe would be the event promoter & BBBoC.

And those parties can't pass on the info because it is confidential.

You can argue it shouldn't be like this, thats another discussion, I'm just going by the rules as they are stated and as I read them. A lawsuit against a party who followed the rules isn't going anywhere.

[Alan Smithee]

Any notice given to Interested Parties and/or other third parties of pending cases pursuant to these Rules shall be provided to them on the confidential basis set out in Code Article 14.1.5.

If Rivas was considered an interested third party under their definition, he would have been notified by UKAD/NADP, the interested third parties in this case I believe would be the event promoter & BBBoC.

And those parties can't pass on the info because it is confidential.

You can argue it shouldn't be like this, thats another discussion, I'm just going by the rules as they are stated and as I read them. A lawsuit against a party who followed the rules isn't going anyway.

How could he not be considered an interested third party? He was fighting the guy. Your logic makes no sense. They legally could have told him and chose not to. Were they required to inform Rivas? No but according to their rules it was permitted.

[MulaKO]

Any notice given to Interested Parties and/or other third parties of pending cases pursuant to these Rules shall be provided to them on the confidential basis set out in Code Article 14.1.5.

If Rivas was considered an interested third party under their definition, he would have been notified by UKAD/NADP, the interested third parties in this case I believe would be the event promoter & BBBoC.

And those parties can't pass on the info because it is confidential.

You can argue it shouldn't be like this, thats another discussion, I'm just going by the rules as they are stated and as I read them. A lawsuit against a party who followed the rules isn't going anyway.

I understand your going by the rules or should I say abiding by them
But in your own opinion , isn’t it fugh nuts that Rivas is not considered a third party in this bullchit
He’s not advised about this , what about if something drastic happened to him

[Alan Smithee]

I understand your going by the rules or should I say abiding by them
But in your own opinion , isn’t it fugh nuts that Rivas is not considered a third party in this bullchit
He’s not advised about this , what about if something drastic happened to him

According to the rules of UKAD they were legally permitted to inform Rivas. They were not obligated to and took a path that may open them up to liability!

[_Rexy_]

“A lawsuit by Groupe Yvon Michel and Rivas might also explore the question of how many other times, if any, the BBBC has allowed a boxer to compete after a positive drug test without notifying the opposing fighter's camp of the positive test result.” - yes please. I’m sure we would all love this list.

[MulaKO]

According to the rules of UKAD they were legally permitted to inform Rivas. They were not obligated to and took a path that may open them up to liability!

Just venting
But if the guy is legally aloud to box , obviously nothing wrong , then why not tell the opposing side

Isn’t that a sign , already , that your guilty of something
Not sure if I’m getting it out right , but they seem like catch 22’s all around
Imagine something happened , would love to hear those sets of rules

[Corelone]

Honest Sid. I'll leave AJ alone, he's done anyway. I won't belittle Hearn and his criminal enterprise anymore. Give me a list of your favorite English fighters, and I'll never mention them again. I know you'll say Yarde, but anything for you Sid.

[REDEEMER]

Waste of money , they can't sue an entire athletic commission who's own rules got the fight cleared meanwhile it wasn't in the U.S either which tests were clean so ?

Where are the grounds to sue , this guy will be bankrupted ? what a dumb move because even if Whyte is banned it wouldn't have broken any laws due to confidentiality that doesn't permit the promotion to disclose a fighters situation which was brought up already.

[Alan Smithee]

I understand your going by the rules or should I say abiding by them
But in your own opinion , isn’t it fugh nuts that Rivas is not considered a third party in this bullchit
He’s not advised about this , what about if something drastic happened to him

Eddie Hearn never said that he was not allowed to inform Rivas. His response was " Why should I tell Rivas when Whyte was cleared to fight". Something along those lines!

[MulaKO]

Eddie Hearn never said that he was not allowed to inform Rivas. His response was " Why should I tell Rivas when Whyte was cleared to fight". Something along those lines!

Wtv Fughnut Hearn did he did
But a commission having rules like that is pretty fughed in my eyes
Like I said before what would they say if something fughed up happened in that fight