0
    0

    Comment on In Whose Interests by easyJambo.

    John Clark 7th November 2019 at 13:46

    From your posting of the 'Sun's stuff, it looks as though there was some substantial business relating to the 'facts ' allegedly backing up Whitehouse's claim, and that it was not a mere case-management affair.

    I'm annoyed that I missed it, whatever it was!

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

    You won't have missed it being discussed in court. The Sun article is timestamped at 08:42 this morning, so was written before the hearing.

    I'm sure the legal teams for each of the claimants will either be already aware of the existence of the emails or will seek to have them disclosed as exculpatory evidence.

    easyJambo Also Commented

    In Whose Interests
    The SPFL's annual report to 31 May 2019 has just been published by Companies House.  It will no doubt be of interest to many posters that the highest paid director (Neil Doncaster?) received a healthy pay rise of £91k taking his remuneration for the year up to £388k. That is despite the SPFL's total revenue falling by more than £1.1m from the previous year.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC175364/filing-history


    In Whose Interests
    Auldheid 7th November 2019 at 15:33

    It's all so obvious now looking back  so why is a sham being allowed to continue to stigmatise Scottish football?

    Whose interests is it really in to sustain  a myth at the expense of whatever future Scottish has?

    https://fanswithoutscarves.org/2019/11/07/stigma-in-scottish-football-part-2-a-lesson-from-history/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

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

    That's a well written and argued piece.


    In Whose Interests
    TRFC back in court in front of Lady Wolffe next Thursday for the Memorial Walls case

    Thursday 14th November

    Procedural Hearing

    Between 9.30am and 10.00am

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

     


    Recent Comments by easyJambo

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    A document lodged with Companies House today notifies us that the Accounting Period for LBJ Sports Apparel Ltd (trades as Elite Group) has been extended from 21 November 2019 to 31 March 2020.

    You could speculate whether or not this relates to the ongoing SDI v TRFC court action, either to simplify or complicate the accounting for their profits, which may be referenced when assessing any damages levied. 


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Nothing to report from the CoS this morning. JC and I were there, but the hearing hadn't been allocated to any judge as yet. With no indication as to when the hearing would start and in the absence of the usual legals and others, we decided that it wasn't worth hanging around.

    Anyway, there was much more interest in what was going on across the road at the High Court with a media scrum awaiting some former political figure emerging from court.


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Another CoS hearing tomorrow in the David Whitehouse v The Lord Advocate case.

    TO BE ALLOCATED

    STARRED MOTIONS

    1 hour – A413/16 David Whitehouse &c v James Wolffe – A & W M Urquhart – SGLD


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    @KieranMaguire aka "PriceOfFootball" on Twitter has put together an easy to understand Youtube video comparing the financial results of Celtic and Rangers (barring one clear and obvious error). He probably used "factcheckUK" to confirm one number, who being Tories decided that it was OK to go with it. 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-FObivFFXM&feature=youtu.be 


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Ex Ludo 18th November 2019 at 18:48

    JohnClark@11.21

    I presume Mr Antonov carried out due diligence into RFC and didn’t like what was uncovered although RFC might have dodged a bullet too.

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

    Here's a selection of tweets from James Doleman during the Whyte trial about a potential sale of the club that fell through.  (I don't know if this was the Antonov proposal)

    Murray says he had a buyer in 06/07 but at the last minute "I pulled out of the deal" as "not in best interests of the club"

    Murray says about potential buyer "I didn't agree with what they were going to do with the club" no other offers of note

    Murray: decision to put club on market taken 06/07. Says had done due diligence on previous potential buyer but pulled out at last minute

    Murray says previous buyer was doing a "property play, building flats on what I considered sacred ground, moving stands"