I found out more today about Mr King’s recent ill-judged foray into the Court of Session.
The Takeover Panel chaps were wise not to interrupt their adversary while he was busy making a mistake.
I’m told that King’s QC admitted something that the other side had wanted to hear all along.
Dave’s guy was asked if he was there just there representing the South African based convicted criminal or was he also there for the club?
The QC agreed that he was in court on behalf of both.
This was a major diversion from the public narrative that King had put out in the local media.
Dave had stated that the Takeover Panel problem was nothing to do with the club.
For the avoidance of doubt, the regulatory authority also wanted Sevco in the frame for the machinations of the Concert Party.
My information is that this will be back in court again at the end of November.
Perhaps this is the reason that Mr Barry Scott is back on the RIFC board.
Is Mr King getting his boardroom ducks in a row?
Developing story…
Discover more from Phil Mac Giolla Bháin
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well Phil, would you believe it. The Sun running with a story that there may be furtpartlegal trouble heading in the direction of Ibrox driven by those awful guys at Sports Direct.
Who are these people?…. to quote Alistair.
Are Hummel and JD Sports going to be caught in the fallout for their part in bringing merchandise to the market?
It’s inconceivable that this is still rumbling on, a year after King stated in the last annual accounts that the one of payment made to SD had ended all court action and the SD dispute was now history.
Ashley appears to be a man who holds grudges and just won’t let this go, even if SD lose money as a result.
With King’s TOP battle also rumbling on with no end in sight, once again the Scottish legal profession will have him first on their Xmas card list.
I see McLeish, EBT, is setting up Griff as a fall guy if the result goes against Scotland tonight.
Big up to BBC Scotland on the early news last night reporting tonight’s game as a friendly!
McLeish should be suspended, at the very least, from his job with the SFA till he’s cleared his tax debt to HMRC and UK society.
What message is the SFA sending out by employing him in the first place?
Perhaps for the sake of his own health McLeish should just jack it in as he looks like a very unwell man in his pressers and TV interviews.
I have to claim ignorance of the finer points of law here. So serious question: what difference does it make if King’s QC was also representing RIFC? Surely he’s allowed to have multiple clients, and people and businesses are allowed to hire any QC they wish. And it’s not like his QC admitted to any wrongdoing on this issue regarding RIFC. Sooo… why does it matter that he was there working on behalf of more than one client?
And I I guess more to the point, if the Takeover Panel wishes to sanction RIFC, they would first have to file a complaint and give RIFC a chance to respond. AFAIK, the panel hasn’t even alleged any official wrongdoing by the club itself.
Seems to me DK is employing his QC through RIFC so he doesn’t have to pay the bill personally. But that’s an issue between DK and the shareholders to resolve and really shouldn’t concern the Takeover Panel.
Seems like this is much ado about nothing. What am I missing here?
It won’t make the slightest difference to whether this latest appeal succeeds or fails, but if Dave King loses, Rangers could well find themselves on the hook for a share of the TOP costs. Especially if DK has his usual troubles in getting his money out of South Africa. After all, goes the thinking, why should one side suffer the expense of worthless appeal after worthless appeal if the other is being bank-rolled by a rich sugar daddy (no laughing at the back).
Said before in previous posts he is getting away with this because the law is an ass. Almost a year a go he was warned that he would be in contempt if he ignored the Court Order. Where are we now? Still going round in circles! Cold shoulder is meaningless in a business that is cash dependent. It is framed for dealing with “honourable” people who respect the rule of law and morality. DK is a “chancer” and someone in the law should now cut across the dross and say your contempt has been declared and the penalty is… Contrary to what Phil is saying I wouldn’t bother following this as it is likely to drag on forever and in that time solvency especially after a decent run in Europa will be a possibility.