Virtuoso 27,180 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Common Sense? Written by: NineteenSeventyTwo Thursday, 5th November 2015 It really should surprise no one in Scotland that the Court of Session ruled in HMRC's favour against the Murray group & RFC2012 with regard to the EBTs used by the Murray Group while they owned Rangers in the naughties.After years of legalities and technical arguments between tax specialists, lawyers, advocates, it has been the decision of three Lords in Edinburgh to ignore the legalities and force through a consensus of opinion contrary to each previous ruling. Their statement was surprisingly candid in referencing 'common sense' rather than any technical legal explanation.Some early reaction in the world of accountancy is interesting, with one observer commenting that the decision is "astonishing".http://www.accountan...tonishing-rebusOne English based QC, Jo Maugham has stated this morning that 'Rangers' are getting a raw deal.When you look at the back story of each of the three judges on the panel, it becomes an even more astonishing story.There were three judges on that panel; Lord Drummond Young, Lord Carloway, and Lord MenziesLord Drummond Young has an impressive CV including several years working for the Inland Revenue (now known as HMRC). Quite why anyone thought he'd be the most objective judge is anyone's guess, but someone did.Also on the panel was Lord Carloway, who Rangers fans will remember sat on an SFA Disciplinary panel that punished Rangers in the form of a transfer embargo, which Rangers challenged and had overturned. Lord Glennie found that the ruling and subsequent punishment was unlawful. Lord Carloway has lost against Rangers, and by all accounts didn't take it well. Was he best placed custodian to rule on the HMRC versus Murray Group/RFC 2012 legal battle?Lord Menzies for his part, also has history with Rangers, being the man who allowed Craig Whyte to appoint Duff and Phelps as administrators of Oldco. Bear in mind the administrators in question are now charged with various counts of fraud in both takeovers of the club, and the running of the club while Administrators. Again I will ask why Lord Menzies was chosen given his history with Rangers affiliated companies?I have little doubt that the Murray group, and BDO, who are in the process of liquidating RFC2012 have a strong case to appeal to the Supreme Court on the technicalities alone, and I expect BDO at least will challenge it, but what of any Supreme Court panel? Given the amount of vultures across the city attempting to find areas to exploit (to punish the new owners of the club), a fair hearing is a must. While some observers are reporting that the SPFL will take no further action against Rangers, my view is that their statement is ambiguous and in no way can be interpreted as closing the door on the issue.I also feel that Rangers statement last night, particularly on the subject of our "history", was not concrete. No one is suggesting that we will lose all of our history, however, there are strong calls for stripping of titles, and unless the club has had a solid pledge from the SPFL that this is never going to happen, then the statement is meaningless.So, given the clamour out there to punish Rangers, more clarity is required from the football bodies, and from BDO before we can rest easy that our enemies end game of title stripping will not be reached.What BDO will need to fight strongly for, is fair representation, and we should all be asking for it, as we have been let down on this appeal.http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/article.php?i=79&a=common-sense? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,287 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 A parcel of rogues Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BridgeIsBlue 66,639 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Common sense would see the filth chucked out of football altogether after their antics,but hey ho move along nothing to see here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Avenger 22,567 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Well let's hope someone takes up the mantle and challenges this stitch up, because IMO that's exactly what it is!.Only in this backwater. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperPapac05 3,383 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Common sense? In Scottish Football? You having a laugh? That article just highlights the utter corruption that we're fighting against. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchieshearercaldow 22,241 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Now that is Common Sence Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsden bear 2,376 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Well let's hope someone takes up the mantle and challenges this stitch up, because IMO that's exactly what it is!.Only in this backwater.Agreed. When you see background of the Judges and what has gone before it can only be viewed as a stitch up.I made reference on here yesterday re the 'common sense' statement. That has got to be a new one when discussing a point of law. I really hope this is challenged, if nothing else it will quieten down the rabid hoards for a bit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEPPS BOY 74,685 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Great article that.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince George 601 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 In the minutes of one of the BDO reports they stated they had a robust case and could not see it being lost. They also thought appeal would be better heard in England. After yesterday's result it appears it has been a stitch up all along. There must be an appeal to the Supreme Court. ???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/article.php?i=79&a=common-sense? Absolutely first class research again from VB .Will the muppets in charge of Rangers do or say anything ? Will the fuck sadly Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moody Blue Legend 61,798 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 The three wise men! Fuck me! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutonblue 1,974 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Unbelievable the background of the three stooges! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tontospal 1,116 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Applying common sense would be having a panel made up of members with no conflicts of interest.Looks very much that we've been stitched up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers#1 5,478 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 If this is true, this ruling has to be appealed and thrown out due to some form of conflict of interest, as it stands its a farce.Cunts have shot themselves in the foot Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcbear 10,924 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 I think we may have some high powered legal people offering their services soon challenging this, not because of their love of our club but more to do with the fact that the ebt system would have been used to the advantage of the super rich companies they represent, and if this goes to the supreme court and HMRC win, there is a potential future fortune for them collecting ebt's from the big companies.Guinea pigs r us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bombaybadboy08 15,660 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 That's a fucking disgrace, how the fuck can that even be allowed to happen?Does no-one look into the background of these cunts before they get to rule over things? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 11,453 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 You honestly couldn't make that up Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 That's a fucking disgrace, how the fuck can that even be allowed to happen?Does no-one look into the background of these cunts before they get to rule over things? The top law guys are all wall to wall beggars and it's been that way for years .No surprise to this para bear :-) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bombaybadboy08 15,660 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 The top law guys are all wall to wall beggars and it's been that way for years .No surprise to this para bear :-)Naw I know that's been highlighted before, by the very guys who wrote this but, still.An ex employee FFS Something that should be looked into, don't really care whether it affects us as a club right now or not, that's wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dummiesoot 16,054 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Not one if them independent, fuck me you could not script such a lack of balance! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B1872 20,965 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Is anyone confident that even if we do appeal then the Supreme Court will hear the case? To me it looks like we haven't many friends in this whole sorry saga. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/article.php?i=79&a=common-sense?Paranoid nonsense from the VB's - really we willBe back to checking which schools they went to next! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP-FOREVER 5,231 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Paranoid nonsense from the VB's - really we willBe back to checking which schools they went to next!wans where they were abused. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EKCO 103 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Paranoid nonsense from the VB's - really we willBe back to checking which schools they went to next!Really? What pish, if you don't understand law then stop being an idiot as per usual.This can easily be seen as prejudice in their written assumption and I hope it is taken further and challenged.Well done VB in highlighting it here but it is already being talked about in legal circles.......this should not end here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 You could well try and make a point relating to Carloway, given a more direct history, but that one of them had a couple of years as counsel for HMRC thirty years ago, and another gave a relatively standard ruling in an administration procedure is pretty thin.And to be honest, regardless of what anyone on here thinks sounds like the way they want it to, conflict of interest seems very unlikely to be a winner for us in any appeal or challenge. 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.