stfu 596 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 My linkThis bit is especially interesting."This has widened the court proceedings because we have substantially larger claims against Collyer Bristow, which we wish to bring as soon as possible. The original trial dates of 30 March - 4 April are now not being utilised as the wider claims are still being formulated. A further hearing will take place as soon as possible after the deadline for claims against Collyer Bristow of 16 April. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Administrators do indeed seem to be suing Collyer Bristow (for £9m?) as previously rumoured. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosesMcNeil 1,664 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 The statement in full.DUFFand Phelps, administrators of Rangers Football Club, today issued the following statement.Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "We are pleased Martin Bain has, in light of the present situation at Rangers, offered to drop his action for damages following his dismissal by Craig Whyte whilst Chairman."Mr Bain has also agreed to release to the Club a significant proportion of the sum that was arrested as part of this action. He has made plain the litigation was a response to the actions of Craig Whyte and not Rangers FC and given developments he now wishes to end the litigation action and do what he can to support the Club in these difficult times."Duff & Phelps have agreed to settle the litigation with Mr Bain thereby avoiding the unnecessary costs of continuing with this court action."On other litigation matters, on 23 March the High Court in London ordered that in addition to the current proceedings regarding the £3.6m that was transferred into the safekeeping of the administrators' lawyers, Taylor Wessing, the parties with claims against Collyer Bristow (the former lawyers to Craig Whyte and Rangers FC) should bring their claims by 16 April 2012."This has widened the court proceedings because we have substantially larger claims against Collyer Bristow, which we wish to bring as soon as possible. The original trial dates of 30 March - 4 April are now not being utilised as the wider claims are still being formulated. A further hearing will take place as soon as possible after the deadline for claims against Collyer Bristow of 16 April."As regards the general administration process, we, as the Club's administrators, would like to pay tribute to Rangers supporters for their continuing outstanding efforts to support the Club at this time."We appreciate greatly the contributions made to the Rangers Fighting Fund and welcome the fact that those who are administering the fund have taken the decision to release funds which will offset some of the debts owed by the Club to other clubs."Bain is good, Collyer Bristow bad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4MenHadADream 122 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 So from that, I read that the Bain case is settled rather than dropped??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dl2068 17 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Administrators do indeed seem to be suing Collyer Bristow (for £9m?) as previously rumoured. And will not C&B then state it was Garry Withey, who no longers works for C&B and therefore......... can see that one being a LONG drawn out affair........ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 So Bain was and is a rangers man after all. Bain hating fan boys won't like this! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Double post Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 So from that, I read that the Bain case is settled rather than dropped???Often the same thing I suspect he settled for costs Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSifter 181 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Administrators do indeed seem to be suing Collyer Bristow (for £9m?) as previously rumoured. Wonderful news for those noble gentlemen of the professional indemnity insurance world... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 And will not C&B then state it was Garry Withey, who no longers works for C&B and therefore......... can see that one being a LONG drawn out affair........No, that doesn't work. He was a partner in CB at the time, end of. The legals will centre around liability arising from what Whithey did, not around whether he or CB is liable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSifter 181 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 And will not C&B then state it was Garry Withey, who no longers works for C&B and therefore......... can see that one being a LONG drawn out affair........If only that were true. The professional indemnity policy covers employees and partners acting in a professional capacity for Collyer Bristow.The claim will be brought against CB and not Withey personally. A big plus for anyone suing a firm of solicitors is their minimum terms policy wording is the widest wording in the PI insurance world so CB will have little trouble triggering the policy. Of course, your typical PI claim takes years to crystallise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoramsGlove 12 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 The fact that Whithey doesn't work there shouldn't matter atall..If the courts call for him then he must present himself. Couldn't imagine that would add any further time to the proceedings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillete 1,338 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 You can see why whithey fucked off thenKnew he would get the sack anyway Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 so the talk of the case being uncontested was indeed nonsense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.