Quantcast

SEVCO & THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

0

YESTERDAY in the Court of Session, Charles Green’s counsel Mr Jonathan Brown, turned his attention to “the vexed question of the mythical concept of the club.” Special thanks for the quotes direct from the Court of Session from James Doleman.

When Lord Doherty stated that the “articles of association show Rangers started as a club”, Mr Brown responded that this changed when Rangers incorporated in 1899 and clarified the position on behalf of his client, Charles Green.

Mr. Brown told the Court of Session: “Sevco Scotland did not buy the club they bought the business and assets of the club. There is a difference between the company and the business assets, but not between a club and a company. A club is an undertaking of it’s owners. As it has neither capacity of personality, no-one can be CEO of a club. The idea that someone can be CEO of an undertaking is just nonsense.”

Realizing the significance of what he was telling Lord Doherty, Brown continued: “I realize that Rangers being the same club is a matter of life and death to some, but it wouldn’t be a proper legal case without the elephant in the room getting mentioned.The team are paid by Sevco, play at a ground owned by Sevco, trained by a manager who is employed by Sevco, fans buy tickets from Sevco. Rangers was a basket of assets that could be sold, but these were not indivisible.The players went one way and the ground another, where is the “club” then?”

And so we got our answer, maybe not from the horse’s mouth but from his lawyer’s. The same club myth was exposed and it happened in the Court of Session. Green’s lawyer was telling the court that  the concept that the club continued with new operators or a new holding company was a nonsense. He said they were Sevco and not Rangers.

The man who sold them the myth to get them to buy season tickets back in 2012, at last told them the hurtful truth.

Lord Doherty , like the rest of us, was probably surprised that the ‘top’ lawyer appearing for RIFC included the same club myth within his submissions. Lord Doherty, seeing the trap, asked if he were to consider the same club story with out evidence and the submissions provided by RIFC to the Advertising Standards Authority got a mention!

Lord Doherty adjourns the case to consider submissions. His verdict will be provided in writing at a later date. He will struggle to avoid comment on the new club/same club debate that raged in his courtroom yesterday.

Earlier this week CQN carried a feature titled  LORD NIMMO SMITH DUPED & THE BANNED NEWSPAPER AD which you can read here: https://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=20191

In this article we explain the problems we had in getting a newspaper to accept an advertisement on the circumstances around the Lord Nimmo Smith ruling. The newspaper involved passed the text in this feature to their lawyers and as a result they refused to carry the advertisement.

The same newspaper, following the same procedure, had no problem running an earlier advertisement from CQN which outlined in detail the legal argument on why Celtic’s then forthcoming League Cup semi final opponents was a new club. Their lawyers considered the text in this advertisement very carefully and the advertisement was given the ‘Green’ light.

Here is the advertisement:

CQNHeraldadvert6

Now if we can go back to June 2012 when Rangers, in Administration and deep in trouble, sought a CVA to ‘ save their history’.

Have a look here: http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=215947

The Rangers support in April 2012 were under no illusions what liquidation meant as they organized their ‘Give Liquidation the Red Card’ demonstration.

This is what they said re forming a newco…

“You won’t simply reform a newco and everything’s bright and rosy, not a chance in hell. The Rangers fan base united won’t allow it, no fans, no players, no sponsor. NOTHING”.

Here’s how it went on the protest day:

And it wasn’t just the Rangers supporters who were clear that liquidation would mean the end of their club.  Here’s a selection of what was said:

“140 years of history is formally ended” (The Herald)

Rangers fans “no longer boast an unbroken line to the past…The emotional ties will remain forever but historical strings are severed. ” (Daily Record)

“…what we’re doing is saying the history, the tradition, everything that is great about this Club, is swept aside.” (Charles Green) !!!!

“Liquidation is no good for Rangers. It will end 140 years of history.” (Craig Whyte on Sky Sports)

“Some Rangers fans believe the club’s history, which would end with liquidation, must be protected but there is a shameful part of that history which they should want to forget and any newco should make it clear a new beginning means exactly that.  A new club open to all from the very beginning.” (Jim Traynor)

“Rangers in crisis: the final whistle sounds on Rangers’ 140 years of history” (Daily Telegraph)

“The formation of Rangers in March 1872 was a walk in the park – its death in June 2012 a shambolic slide into the abyss… they no longer boast an unbroken line to the past. The emotional ties will remain for ever but historical strings are severed. In time, they may weave a new history that might start with the Third Division title in 2013.” (Gary Ralston)

“The really sickening thing about all of this is it was avoidable. All it would have taken for that was for someone to be honest. Pay your dues, give the tax man what he is owed.  Instead Rangers have died.” (Richard Gough)

“The reality is that in technical terms, the doors are closed on the history of Rangers…There will be plenty of pedants who feel the old Rangers are now gone, and technically they are right.” (Kevin Drinkell)

“Air of unreality as 140 years of history is formally ended in less than nine minutes…The Rangers creditors drifted in through Exit 50 at Ibrox Stadium just before 10am and by 10.09am they were on their way out. In those few minutes 140 years of history had been rubbed out”. (The Herald)

And this one…

“140 years of history, triumph and tears… have ended.  No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out Rangers as we know them died.  They were closed and a newco must start from scratch.” (Jim Traynor)

Jim Traynor writing about Charles Green attempting to ‘dress it up’ but the fact remains that ‘a newco equals a new club’.

So you would expect that Jonathan Brown’s submissions in the Court of Session yesterday, on behalf of Charles Green, would be front page news today. The papers could even say they were right all along when they ran these front page stories back in 2012:

Yet if you were expecting Mr Brown’s submissions to be featured prominently, or at all, in today’s newspapers you would be surprised to learn that they don’t regard Green’s view that it’s Sevco and not Rangers as being newsworthy. Indeed that would be particularly problematic for The Scotsman as they have actually banned the word ‘Sevco’ for being a sectarian term!

Of course the newspaper editors were given a way out by Dave King who within an hour or so of Lord Doherty bringing proceedings for the day to an end in the Court of Session released an angry and aggressive statement which opened with this:

“It is disappointing that a debate has re-emerged around the subject of Rangers’ history in Scottish football. It must be especially frustrating for the Club’s supporters who again find individuals within the structures of Scottish football unfairly targeting the Club.”

and ended with this…

‘For the avoidance of doubt, however, I wish to make one point clear. If the history of our Club comes under attack we will deal with it in the strongest manner possible and will hold to account those persons who have acted against their fiduciary responsibilities to their own clubs and to Scottish football.’

It is perhaps lucky for King that he managed to mention other clubs at the end of this remarkable statement, which as others have observed, contradicts King’s previously stated position that Rangers should apologize for the use if illegal EBTs. If he had failed to mention the clubs then Lord Doherty, who is now considering the submissions presented to him yesterday, may well have come to the conclusion that King was threatening HIM instead of merely limiting himself to threatening the other football clubs.

The final word maybe should go to Charles Green and while he may have struggled to make the front page, or even the back page in the newspapers this morning, that was not always the case. Remember Chuck said ”I’ll Be Back’ and was pictured on the front page of The Sun with a loaded gun.

Looks like Mr Brown fired Green’s ‘loaded gun’ in the Court of Session yesterday.

images

 
Click Here for Comments >
Share.

About Author