0
    0

    Comment on Accountability via Transparency. by easyJambo.

    John Clark 12th May 2019 at 23:00

    I was today idly researching the history of Berwick Rangers [ and  the stunning come-backs for Liverpool and Spurs should surely give them some hope that all is not yet lost in the battle against Cove Rangers ( of which our friend Alan McRae of the SFA was a few years ago a director)].

    =============================

    I've no great allegiances either way re the play-off. However, I think that it would be good for the guid folk of Aberdeen to have another club in the SPFL. I'm very much pro pyramid, so any change to the make-up of the SPFL is welcome.

    It would also make the possibility of a local "wee Rangers" derby between Berwick (Lowland League) and their neighbours Tweedmouth (East of Scotland League). Their grounds at Shielfield and Old Shielfield are adjacent so they are, to the best of my knowledge the closest pair of grounds in senior football, only the width of a boundary wall apart..

    07641591-FF4F-4598-A94D-87DAF32C6C45.png

     

    easyJambo Also Commented

    Accountability via Transparency.
    Confirmation that Andrew Dallas is to step down as a FIFA ref.

    www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48725205

    He cites personal/work reasons, although others have suggested it was because he was going to be demoted in any event.


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Not a huge amount to report on the Grier v Police Scotland case at the CoS this morning.

    Both parties and Lord Bannatyne were content to have the case heard at the CoS. It was previously being heard at Glasgow Sheriff Court.

    There appeared to be some confusion about how the parties wished to proceed, to a procedural hearing, then a summary decree motion, debate or a proof before answer. We didn't get a decision other than a procedural hearing will be scheduled on 12 July, for which both parties were asked to provide notes on the issues they wished to pursue in advance.

    What did come out was that DCI Robertson (remember him) has apparently, as recently as February this year, admitted that errors were made in bringing the fraud / conspiracy case forward against Grier. For their part, Grier's team is still waiting for disclosure of documents requested many months ago.

    As I suggested in a post a week or so ago, Grier, Whitehouse and Clark are all seeking to show malice and lack of probable cause when they were arrested, detained and charged. Reading between the lines it appears that Robertson has acknowledged in the last few months that didn't have an evidential basis for the arrests. I don't know how Police Scotland will seek to defend those "errors" other than they were made in good faith and not malice. The alternative would be to seek immunity from prosecution on the basis that they were acting on the instruction of the Lord Advocate. 

    Police Scotand's QC seemed somewhat put out by something that Grier's team had submitted to the Court about the former Lord Advocate, Frank (now Lord) Mulholland, describing a misrepresentation of Police Scotland's position as "outrageous".

    I'm sure that JC will be along later with his verbatim account of proceedings.

     


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Yes  …. I mean no …… well maybe yes

    Sky Sports Scotland‏Verified account @ScotlandSky 

    BREAKING NEWS: Celtic are set to sign David Turnbull despite it looking like the deal had fallen through earlier this week. The midfielder had visited Norwich in the last few days but is expected to sign for the Scottish Champions tomorrow.


    Recent Comments by easyJambo

    Bad Money?
    https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/message-to-supporters/

    RANGERS would like to reassure supporters that matters concerning the litigation currently being brought against it by SDI Retail Services Limited are not as reported.

    Rangers was disappointed by the terms of the recent court Judgment but respects the decision of the court and will meet any financial award made by the court.

    No such award has yet been decided and at this stage Rangers does not even know how much will be sought. Contrary to some reports, the Judge has not determined that the contractual cap on damages will not apply.

    Rangers would also like to reassure supporters that no steps have been taken to stop supporters being able to buy this Season’s Replica Kits.

                  • +

    So there we have it. Nothing to see here, nothing to worry about, just keep doing what you are doing.

    Some reassurance that they can pay £1m though.


    Bad Money?
    nawlite 23rd July 2019 at 16:15

    Thanks EJ. I just can't understand how SDI benefit from the injunction if, as you describe, it's just that TRFC can't perform the Elite/Hummel agreement. I accept it gives them back the deal/matching rights from 2021, but that doesn't compensate them for loss of income in the preceding seasons.

    You don't mention the currently existing damages cap of £1m, which is for the moment still in place. If TRFC won't negotiate beyond that and SDI won't accept less than what they've lost out on, they have to go back to court for a decision, yes? At that point, would the judge have to remove the cap to allow SDI to get the right amount of damages from TRFC (multi-millions as he has said)? If the damages cap remains, how would SDI get what it is due?

    ============================

    You have answered your own questions. The £1m cap is still there. However Justices Persey and Teare have both come down on the side of SDI in accepting that the capped amount is insufficient. see Paras 92  & 93.  TRFC may offer £1m, but SDI may say no and the parties end up back in court. 

    There could be some horse trading to be had on a future deal between TRFC and SDI that could limit TRFC's payment to the capped amount. Should that happen, then SDI may seek additional recompense from Elite and/or Hummel.

    I take a fairly simplistic view that the judgement confirms that SDI is due damages from TRFC for the  breach of contract, the amount or form of which remains to be agreed by the parties, or failing that by the court.

    Your subsequent post is also a fair representation of the current dilemma facing all the parties and the fans.


    Bad Money?
    nawlite 23rd July 2019 at 14:53

    =========================

    My understanding is that injunctive relief is simply the consequence or effect of an injunction, i.e. SDI will benefit (gain relief) from the injunction imposed on TRFC.

    The judgement also involved declaratory relief being granted to SDI. That was Justice Pesey's ruling (declaratory judgement or declaration) on how the law would be interpreted in the dispute between the parties, i.e. in favour of SDI.

    It is now for the parties to come to a damages settlement or, failing that, to come back to the court and have it decide on the amount. I don't think TRFC will want to run the risk of having the court decide, when it has already recognised that SDI's losses will be many millions. The £3m paid on termination of the previous agreement is an example of TRFC paying up to avoid the court deciding for them.

    I'm less certain how this will play out with regard to Hummel and Elite. They were awarded contracts covering three seasons, this season is the second of the three, although elsewhere in the document it appears to indicate just a two year deal for some elements.

    Justice Persey said:

    Elite and Hummel have until now performed and enjoyed the benefit of the Elite/Hummel agreement. The 2018/2019 season has been completed and, as the evidence before me showed, preparations for the 2019/2020 season were well underway by the time of the hearing. Had the rights been offered to SDIR then SDIR would have found itself in the shoes of Elite and would have been in a position to make the sales and profits that Elite has made. Mr Sa’ad Hossain QC, who appeared on behalf of SDIR, acknowledged that as matters now stand SDIR is reduced to a damages claim in respect of the 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 seasons. 

    My reading of the injunction granted is that TRFC has been ordered to stop providing any support immediately to both Hummel and Elite, although the club will be able to wear the new kit for this season.

    As the injunction is against TRFC and not Hummel and Elite, I think that Hummel and Elite can continue to sell this season's home, away and third kits, but TRFC cannot be seen to be assisting them.  

    I believe that Elite and Hummel could both sue TRFC for loss of potential earnings for part of this season and for the whole of next season, in addition to SDI's claim for two seasons losses.

    Next season, TRFC looks as if it will be back to square one with SDI operating the retail operations, or being in a position to match any third party offer.


    Bad Money?
    I suspect that most people missed this story yesterday

    https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-board-elected-for-201920

    Stewart Robertson was elected to the SPFL Board.

    Just as Justice Persey observed "Mr Robertson was, in my view, a mouthpiece for Rangers." 


    Bad Money?
    naegreetin 22nd July 2019 at 17:45

    Interesting to see how the smsm handle this judgement – my money is on they will ignore it .

    ================================

    I'm just waiting for the announcement of a settlement with SDI, i.e. that SDI has acquired the rights to any fees obtained from the sale of Morelos and Tavernier.