Virgin Media News

[TV Boy]

BSkyB is preparing for a courtroom showdown with arch-rival Virgin Media today in a bid to prevent the disclosure of confidential business documents.

At a hearing last month, a judge threw out Sky's application to prevent three of Virgin Media's lawyers viewing documents it was set to hand over as part of the pre-trial disclosure process.

Mr Justice Lewison rejected the application by Sky, saying it would be "extremely disruptive of trial preparations". He ordered Sky to pay Virgin Media's costs, put at £30,000. Sky immediately said it would appeal.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/mai...4/cnsky114.xml

Info from Telegraph.

---------- Post added at 10:32 ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 ----------

Virgin rapped for "cheapest Setanta" ads
Adverts claiming that "the cheapest way to get Setanta Sports" is to subscribe to Virgin Media's cable TV service were misleading, the Advertising Standards Agency has ruled.

The national press adverts stated: "If you don't want to know the cheapest way to get Setanta Sports, look away now."

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...tanta-ads.html

Story from Digital Spy.

[batchain]

Originally Posted by TV Boy

BSkyB is preparing for a courtroom showdown with arch-rival Virgin Media today in a bid to prevent the disclosure of confidential business documents.

At a hearing last month, a judge threw out Sky's application to prevent three of Virgin Media's lawyers viewing documents it was set to hand over as part of the pre-trial disclosure process.

Mr Justice Lewison rejected the application by Sky, saying it would be "extremely disruptive of trial preparations". He ordered Sky to pay Virgin Media's costs, put at £30,000. Sky immediately said it would appeal.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/mai...4/cnsky114.xml

Info from Telegraph.

BSkyB loses Virgin appeal

Within minutes of hearing the case yesterday, three of the country's top judges threw out Sky's appeal and ordered the satellite broadcaster to pay Virgin £40,000 in costs.


Sky has handed over 8,800 documents, 7,900 of which are confidential, to Virgin's legal team.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/mai...5/cnsky115.xml

[braysoj1]

The Court of Appeal has rejected a request from Sky regarding a pre-trial disclosure package pertaining to the firm's carriage dispute case with Virgin Media.

Sky had sought confirmation that the lawyers who saw the documents would not also be working on two other ongoing matters involving both firms. Virgin is employing legal firm Ashursts for the carriage case, its appeal against a Competition Commission ruling on Sky's stake in ITV and the Ofcom review of the pay TV market.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...n-dispute.html

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I don't want to get involved in a slagging match, of Sky and VM, but this whole business, wants to make me puke, Most of the channels on VM have to go through certain legal matters, as this would invlove Sky, so no one would win, with VM taking Sky to court is a total waste of money, we now have the news, that the trial is going to be next year, l say again, WHY does VM have to waste OUR money in going to court, to prove or win what, It is up to ANY business, to get a good price for its products, Sky has more channels, becuase, that is what the channels want, they want to be with Sky, VM will only have the channels, they feel are nessersary on there network, which is wrong, VM have to have channels that benefit there customers, I don't think Sky are trying to rip off VM, we all know that this is a bitter dispute, started by Sir Richard, when he tried to buy ITV, and Sky pip him, and he has a sore nose, why the hell don't they just sit round a table and sort the matter out, instead of lining some rich lawyers pockets, Arh.Arh

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I don't want to get involved in a slagging match, of Sky and VM, but this whole business, wants to make me puke, Most of the channels on VM have to go through certain legal matters, as this would invlove Sky, so no one would win, with VM taking Sky to court is a total waste of money, we now have the news, that the trial is going to be next year, l say again, WHY does VM have to waste OUR money in going to court, to prove or win what, It is up to ANY business, to get a good price for its products, Sky has more channels, becuase, that is what the channels want, they want to be with Sky, VM will only have the channels, they feel are nessersary on there network, which is wrong, VM have to have channels that benefit there customers, I don't think Sky are trying to rip off VM, we all know that this is a bitter dispute, started by Sir Richard, when he tried to buy ITV, and Sky pip him, and he has a sore nose, why the hell don't they just sit round a table and sort the matter out, instead of lining some rich lawyers pockets, Arh.Arh

Sky were charging too much for the channels and Virgin did not feel they are worth that much. Nothing to do with the ITV thing.

The court case is looking like it might be in court this summer not next year.