0
    0

    Comment on Accountability via Transparency. by easyJambo.

    Court diary for next week

    TO BE ALLOCATED

    Tuesday 18th June

    Proof Before Answer (4 days)

     A413/16 David Whitehouse &c v Lord Advocate  –  A & W M Urquhart  –  Scottish Government

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

    LORD BANNATYNE – J Hannah, Clerk

    Wednesday 19th June

    Preliminary Hearing Between 9.00am and 9.30am

    CA132/18 Memorial Walls Ltd v The Rangers Football Club Ltd  –  MBM Commercial LLP  –  Anderson Strathern LLP

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

    Friday 21st June

    Starred Motion  Between 10.30am and 11.00am

    CA86/19 David Grier v the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland  –  Ledingham Chalmers LLP

    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://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17783081.rangers-lose-latest-round-merchandise-fight-mike-ashley/

    Bosses at Rangers have lost the latest round of a long-running High Court fight over merchandise with Sports Direct owner Mike Ashley.

    A company in the Sports Direct Group, SDI Retail Services, has said bosses at the Glasgow football club have been in breach of obligations under a deal relating to replica kit.

    Bosses at Rangers disputed claims made against them.

    Judge Lionel Persey finished overseeing the latest in a series of hearings at the High Court in London earlier this year.

    He said on Friday, at a High Court hearing in London, that he had ruled in favour of SDI after analysing a number of issues in the latest stage of the dispute.

    The judge has not yet published a full ruling outlining the detail of that dispute or the reasoning behind his decision.

    In June he ruled on the meaning of one agreement after lawyers representing the rival camps were unable to agree the terms of that agreement.

    A ruling outlining the reasoning behind that decision has recently been published online.

    Rangers lost a round of the fight in October.

    Another judge ruled Rangers had breached the terms of an agreement made with SDI.

    Mr Justice Teare concluded bosses at Rangers had made a new agreement with another firm without giving SDI a chance to match that firm's offer.

    SDI subsequently made further complaints


    Bad Money?
    John Clark 18th July 2019 at 21:18

    Has this already been posted?

    "ROLLS BUILDING
    COURT 1
    Before LIONEL PERSEY QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court

    Friday 19 July 2019
    At 02:00 PM

    Judgment

    CL-2018-000726 SDI Retail Services Limited v. The Rangers Football Club limited"

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

    Yes …. by your good self 20 minutes ago. laugh


    Bad Money?
    upthehoops 17th July 2019 at 14:35

    https://johnjamessite.com/

    Interesting article today by John James on the construct of Rangers European squad and their eligibility under homegrown player rules. If what he says is accurate it is surely worth a challenge by Rangers next opponents or even the ones they will eliminate on Thursday night.  Also, if what he says is accurate then it is shameful by the SFA if they are knowingly allowing it. 

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

    The fact that Rangers squad is limited to 23 instead of the allowed 25 is an admission that they don't have sufficient club-trained players, although they do have a full quota of association trained players.

    A "club-trained player" is a player who, between the age of 15 (or the start of the season during which he turns 15) and 21 (or the end of the season during which he turns 21), and irrespective of his nationality and age, has been registered with his current club for a period, continuous or not, of three entire seasons (i.e. a period starting with the first official match of the relevant national championship and ending with the last official match of that relevant national championship) or of 36 months. In the context of this paragraph, the season immediately preceding a player’s 15th birthday may be counted if his birthday is after the last match of the relevant national championship but before or on 30 June (winter championships) or 31 December (summer championships), and the season immediately following his 21st birthday may be counted if his birthday is on or after 1 July (winter championships) or 1 January (summer championships) but before the first match of the relevant national championship.

    The final squad sizes are dependent on the numbers of club and association trained players as per Annex H of the attached document.

    https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefaorg/Regulations/02/60/88/40/2608840_DOWNLOAD.pdf

    A squad size of 23 suggests that they have claimed two club trained and four association trained players to make up their squad.  The question is who are the two club trained players.  I would guess that McGregor will be one, notwithstanding the old/new club argument. If JJ is correct about the dates and ages of players when they were with the old/new club, then they don't have a second club trained player, so their squad size should be limited to 22.

    The sort of sanction the UEFA would place on the club would be a further restriction on squad size for a future game rather than expulsion.

     


    Bad Money?
    John Clark 15th July 2019 at 20:46

    BL-2018-002250 DESMOND v Whyte and another "

    Please someone tell me that these are not Dermot Desmond , majority shareholder and Board member of Celtic ,  and Craig Whyte last owner of the original Rangers Football Club of 1872?

    That really would be a coincidence!

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

    RES 12 finally sees some real action 

    If only. blushsurpriseangel


    Bad Money?
    It was remiss of me to forget to keep an eye on the latest BDO Report to Ceditors for RFC 2012 plc (IL). The document was published just over a month ago, and covers the period up to the end of April 2019.

    https://www.bdo.co.uk/getmedia/4d6c085d-c01f-4e05-a430-acdf44f4995c/Report-to-Creditors-10-June-2019.pdf.aspx

    There isn't much new information to be had. BDO continue to rack up their own and their lawyers fees, although no further dividends have been paid to creditors.

    However, there is an update on the litigation with HJL on behalf of Wavetower (TRFCG) which may be of interest to JC and others.

    The previous reports dated 5 December 2017, 8 June 2018 and 7 December 2018 set out the circumstances under which various claims have been submitted by Wavetower, and how on each occasion these had been rejected by the Joint Liquidators, most recently a revised claim of £2.8m. In September 2018, HJL had intimated that Wavetower would seek to increase its claim to £18m and consider appointing receivers over the Company. The Joint Liquidators took steps to avoid such an eventuality and obtained an interim interdict in favour of the Company which precluded Wavetower from making a receivership appointment.

    This matter remained a focus of the Joint Liquidators’ attention during the course of the period, and it has continued to progress in accordance with the Court procedure.

    In parallel with the Court procedure, and in order to attempt to reach a consensual resolution of the dispute without further recourse to the Court, the Joint Liquidators agreed to a mediation which took place on 12 November 2018. The mediation occurred following it being agreed between the parties that the proceedings in Scotland, in respect of Wavetower’s appeal of the Joint Liquidators’ decision to reject its claim, would be sisted for a period of 3 months, such period to expire on 13 November 2018 (the day after the mediation date).

    Whilst the mediation did not result in an agreement being reached between the parties, it was agreed that the discussions would continue outside of the formal mediation process, and the parties agreed to continue to sist the Court process. As at the date of this report, the discussions are ongoing, but the Joint Liquidators hope to be able to provide a substantive update in the next report to creditors.

    …. and

    All creditors should note that the quantum and timing of future dividends is unknown and will be dependent on the outcome of the Wavetower claim. Once this is resolved, it would be the intention of the Joint Liquidators to pay a further dividend as soon as possible.