AS they were celebrating a major legal victory over former chief executive Charles Green, it emerged yesterday that the Rangers board could be facing defeat either at the club’s Annual General Meeting later today or some time in the next three weeks in the civil court.
Green had taken Rangers to the Court of Session in Edinburgh demanding the club pay his legal fees – the Yorkshireman and others are facing criminal charges at a trial next year relating to the 2012 takeover of the club which was then in administration.
Lawyers for Green argued a clause in his contract meant Rangers had to pay Green’s “reasonable professional costs and expenses” – a sum possibly running into six figures depending on the length and complexity of the trial.
Judge Lord Doherty spelled the clause out in a summary of his judgement in favour of Rangers.
It stated: “The company will pay any reasonable professional (including, without limitation, legal and accounting) costs and expenses properly incurred by the employee after the date of this agreement which arise from having to defend, or appear in, any administrative, regulatory, judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings by a third party as a result of his having been chief executive of The Rangers Football Club or the company.”
The judge concluded: “On a proper construction of the clause those criminal proceedings do not fall within its ambit.”
Lord Doherty issued a written opinion to Rangers and Green but added that the opinion should not be made public until after the criminal proceedings against Green and his co-accused have been concluded.
Green does have the right to appeal against the decision, but there was no indication of that yesterday.
Meanwhile Sports Direct billionaire and Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has made it clear today’s AGM will not end his battle against chairman Dave King even if crucial votes go against him.
Later this morning at the SECC, the AGM of the club will vote on two resolutions aimed at consolidating the board members’ grip on Rangers International Football Club plc by converting their loans into shares and issuing new shares, diluting Ashley’s holding.
A third resolution, No 11, that would effectively have banned Ashley from having a say in Rangers’ affairs – despite being the third-largest shareholder – was withdrawn after a court action by Ashley and his company MASH Holdings.
The National has learned that even if the remaining two resolutions are voted through – and one is not certain to pass as it requires a 75 per cent majority – Ashley will go to court if the board acts on them, and legal sources say he is “confident of winning.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here