Jump to content

Club statement | Resolution not deemed competent


OceanRain

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 27.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Coop said:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/296

296 Procedure for signifying agreement to written resolution

(1)A member signifies his agreement to a proposed written resolution when the company receives from him (or from someone acting on his behalf) an authenticated document—

(a)identifying the resolution to which it relates, and

(b)indicating his agreement to the resolution.

(2)The document must be sent to the company in hard copy form or in electronic form.

(3)A member's agreement to a written resolution, once signified, may not be revoked.

(4)A written resolution is passed when the required majority of eligible members have signified their agreement to it.

 

--------

 

The act seems to indicate resolutions are only to be agreed or not answered at all because it doesn't deal with No votes.  I think the way they are intended to work is a resolution is proposed and they only want to know who agrees with it and if/when it passes the required threshold, the proposal is carried.  A No vote isn't even a thing according to that law therefore anyone voting No can change that vote up to the 28 day period.

It's pretty ambiguous tbh. 

The CA06 is silent explicitly on the revoking a no vote. However whilst it has explicit rules which must be adhered to and works as an overarching legislation, where the Articles or proposal rules are explicit and the Act is silent then I'd argue it's reasonable for a Board to have to adhere to those criteria within the rules and Articles.

From the attachment below. Notes (1) clearly gives the option to accept and adopt the proposal or reject it. Unless there's a precedent out there I'd be extremely surprised if the spfl successfully defended any legal challenge made against the decision to revoke a no vote. The alleged non receipt of emails only confuses the situation further.

Imo only a legal challenge would get to the bottom of what is / isnt acceptable in these particular circumstances.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, soulboy said:

Why oh why when we had the chance to vote that paedo bastards out of the league in the 50's did we not do it would have saved ourselves a lot of shit since. 

Because we have dignity and respect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dummiesoot said:

This is ripping apart the scottish game, much more than 2012 as far as other clubs are concerned as they were all United in kicking fuck out of us, this has some infighting , which is nice atm.

It's the bullies vs the bullied. And right now the bullied are very much on the front foot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

Inverness refused to be coerced into voting in favour of a paedophile ring for cash and they are being vilified for it.

Meanwhile the paedophile ring are being treated like some sort of victim by the media.

I am born in Scotland and have lived here all my life but I don’t have despise the fucking shithole it has become since Catholics got into positions of power.

The most embarrassing wee country in the world.

Well done to all the clubs who voted against the Fenian bastards. 

Be proud of yourselves. 

Can I criticise you for inserting a capital C in cafolik ffs and capital F in dirty fenian bhastards?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, esquire8 said:

 

Might be an idea to follow this guy as well as MarkConfusion. Don't know if any of you know who this actually is.

If Joe Black's word is true, it sounds to me that they have given up/ran out of time in knowing that slanty is privy to inside information at UEFA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, soulboy said:

Why oh why when we had the chance to vote that paedo bastards out of the league in the 50's did we not do it would have saved ourselves a lot of shit since. 

Before my time but something rings a bell it was Rangers that saved their stinking fucking skin, Would I be right ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Paisley Blue Loyal said:

Before my time but something rings a bell it was Rangers that saved their stinking fucking skin, Would I be right ?

yeah we had the casting vote and saved the slimey fuckers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Said it before I hope the evidence isn’t the leaked WhatsApp conversion and I hope to fuck Scott gardiner isn’t the whistleblower. 

Tbh I don’t think the evidence is the WhatsApp screenshots but I listened to clydessb driving up the road and there is already thinly vailed (sometimes more obvious) defence of the collusion between clubs. While I know it’s not a crime it doesn’t sit right with me.

I hope the evidence is damning and incriminates the spfl. I also hope the email trail between Dundee, other clubs and the spfl is exposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, TheFamousPigeon said:

"I wouldn't hand Rangers the title if it was the other way around"

 

Says it all.

Cannot argue with a direct quote. Tbf if he said any different he’d be the biggest liar in existence 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MoodyBlue1872 said:

Rae certainly is part of a long list of ex players who constantly let us down mate. 

Not seen anything from McCann. He's one of the few who is normally quite decent. 

I don’t think he lets us down out of lack of loyalty.

Its just he isn’t very clever. 

Happy to listen to him talk football. But anything regarding scandal or the political side of our game makes me want to cry

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...