QC required DF where r u ?

[bluepieter 7]

I'm new at this so please bear with me.

I am so f'ng angry right now with the almost complete capitulation of our club whilst the SFA and SPL set about the destruction of 140 years of unmatched and glorious history. Its about time the club take positive steps to take some control over its own destiny instead of bending over again and again to be repeatedly shafted by those b'stards.

First point. The plc is being liquidated solely as a result of the actions of a director who may have committed criminal acts both in his acquisition and subsequent running of the plc during last year. These events are now the subject of investigations by the uk prosecution authorities and the liquidator. It would seem reasonable therefore that the football club should be protected I.e. Not further harmed, at least until those investigations are concluded. I'm no lawyer, but surely natural justice would demand that this was the case. At the very least this surely needs looking into....

Second, I'm not sure if its the football club or the plc that are members of the SFA, but when u read the rules it seems to say that a judicial panel will decide on the actions to take when the corporate body suffers an insolvency event. This is important because that would imply that if it is the club that is a member,it could retain its membership even through the liquidation of a corporate body with which it had been associated. Again, I think this is at least worth looking into by a lawyer.

Third, the role of the SFA in all of this needs going through with a fine tooth comb after the dust settles. Who knew what and when, what actions they took need examined to establish whether the SFA carried out its duties fairly and diligently.

Does anyone know a good lawyer ?

[philiprfc 1,799]

I agree with the first and third points. I believe that it's the plc that's part of the SFA, though I could be wrong.

[daviec1953 147]

I thought we already had a QC , Ricard Keen , who attended the Court of Session and ripped the SFA a new one over the Transfer ban debacle.

I can only imagine that Mr Green and whoever gives him legal advice also know that as time goes on the moral balance is moving more and more in our favour.

We all know that a crime was comitted aginst Rangers FC by Craig Whyte ,he subjected our Club to Fraud and criminal Corporate Management and we have to get this information out and into the public gaze - showing the SPL/SFA up for the biased , incompetent wankers they surely are.

They have known for several months that we are victims in all this , yet they still decide to inflict further punishments and humiliation on a Club which has already suffered as victims of a crime.

This may indicate to anyone looking in from the outside that these are people with an agenda aginst one particular group, and will note that the agenda is being pursued even in the knowledge that a Criminal Proscecution is about to happen.

The SPL/SFA stand to be sued by Rangers for their contempt of Scottish Law by acting before the outcome of any criminal investigation is known.

Was I right in thinking that the SFA have made our future membership of their corrupt organisation conditional on us agreeing not to use the Courts of Law, even if we think what they are doing to us is unlawful.?

I dont know for sure but it would seem unlawful to include a condition like that in any kind of membership conditions. I really hope we threaten them with the Court of Session on that point alone.

[bluepieter 7]

The transfer ban was hearing addressed only the issue of sanctions imposed for bringing the game into disrepute. A lot has happened since then, most notably the announcement of a criminal investigation into the takeover and subsequent running of the club by CW. My point is that the club needs protection now from further damage that could be done as a result of potentially criminal acts. The Court of Session would seem like a very good place to start to take action to protect the club's assets, and the Court of Arbitration. For Sport the place to go get a ruling on sporting sanctions, such as demotion, expulsion from SFA etc. What the club needs is action now before it is further harmed. Would this be an appropriate use of the RFF money ? I certainly think so.

In response to your last point. I agree. Anyone who asks that you sign away your legal rights must have a reason for doing so. That reason is highly unlikely to be to our advantage. It is normally the act of someone with something to hide.

[bluepieter 7]

Phill, would it be possible to find out. My guess is that if any club was a member of the SFA before it became a ltd co or plc, that would suggest that its the club rather than the corporate body that holds the membership ?

[j1mgg 3,766]

Yip Richard Keen is the guy we should be getting to handle our stuff on the law side.

[legalbeagle 3,734]

I am pretty sure DF is in Cowdenbeath. And to be honest, he couldn't even get himself off when the media turned on him, don't see how he'll help us.

[barcodebear 85]

I am pretty sure DF is in Cowdenbeath. And to be honest, he couldn't even get himself off when the media turned on him, don't see how he'll help us.

Corporate /Commercial Law isn't his area of expertise ........... Criminal Law is.

He would be like a spare prick at a wedding trying to defend The Club.

[whytes3 254]

I think there is a real difficulty for us if we start challenging everything the sfa does through the courts.

FIFA were gagging for us to get a hammering for challenging the transfer ban which was a legitimate challenge but nonetheless could have blown up in our face (and may still).

Let's tackle the main obstacle of getting back into a league before we start fighting legal battles as we could see ourselves with lots of court dates but no football fixtures to play otherwise.

I'm not condoning for one minute the treatment we have received from the SFA but I think we need to fight a cleverly as we can here.

[bluepieter 7]

My question is, who can make it happen ? Even if everyone on here agrees that there is a case to be made, its needs someone to take action for the case to be heard.

Sorry but I don't think its a smart move to wait until we're in Div 3 before we start defending ourselves. I suggested the COS deal with protection of the clubs assets and the CAS deal with sporting issues not to pick a fight with the SFA but because the CAS is the appellate body when we don't agree with the SFA.

[ray 105]

No authority or perceived authority is above the law of the land that includes any football authority you like to mention.

I am coming to the conclusion that the club do not wish to challenge anything, that is every bit as bad as murray's lack of backbone.

The question is why is Charlie apparently so willing for us to be castrated and then slit our own throats ?

[bluepieter 7]

My point is the announcement of a criminal investigation is potentially a game changer that calls into question the validity of everything that has happened since. We can't turn the clock back but we can try to protect the club from further damage. Green's not going to do it. No new owner would as they've picked up the clubs assets at a knock down price. I'm asking if anyone on here knows who to talk to in the RFF to see if the approach is worth pursuing.