johnnyc13

Kings Statement This part of the statement might come back to haunt them: "Certain players may not have signed for the Club without the perceived benefit of personal tax savings." I think the lawyers will find this extremely interesting. Stupid ***s are stupid

Angry type statement from the club/company incoming

The Elephant in the Room In a previous article, The Reservoir Dogs of Rangers, I outlined the testimony of the colour-coded ciphers in the final appeal by HMRC. A new colour has entered the Rangers lexicon, namely Mr Jonathan Brown. Readers of my article (Greens litigation cover could include defending an investors class action suit re IPO) published September 25, will not be surprised by Mr Brown’s opening gambit that the “prospect of future litigation was specifically mentioned in the IPO prospectus.“ Mr Brown continues by stating “The risk that someone might seek to unpick this transaction was clearly anticipated.“ At this juncture, there is a surprising development. Mr Brown has an ace up his sleeve. Apparently the solicitor that drew up Mr Green’s contract of employment, also acted for Mr Coulsen. The implication here is that the contract could withstand legal challenge by anyone choosing to refer to the Coulson case precedents. Mr Brown then presents to court contract between “The Rangers Football Club Ltd” and Charles Green from September 2012 which has been backdate to June 1st. Mr Brown then moves on to “the vexed question of the mythical concept of the club.” Lord Doherty states that the “articles of association show Rangers started as a club.” Brown responded that this changed when Rangers incorporated in 1899. Brown continued: “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.” 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.Theteam 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?” With these statements Mr Brown refutes the concept that the club continued with new operators or a new holding company, which was the preferred narrative of the RIFC legal team. He concludes that the team playing at Ibrox is Sevco, not Rangers. Mr Brown pointed out that Mr Green was happy to depart the scene without fuss, but if he was dragged back in “you pay the lawyers.” The wording of the indemnity agreement shows “it was to be as wide as possible.” The costs decision can not wait until criminal case is over, as “The rainy day has arrived.” Jonathan Brown then finishes his submissions on behalf of his client Charles Green. Mr Wolffe then rises to rebut by making a few short points.He agrees that Green is “entitled to the presumption of innocence” on the criminal charges. Mr Wolffe suggests Lord Doherty can “draw an inference from the criminal indictment” which he refers to as his “fallback position.” As proceedings draw to a close, Lord Doherty gives leave to Mr Brown to have the last word.The Court is told that Mr Green is seeking funding for senior counsel, junior counsel, solicitors and any experts senior counsel wishes to call. Lord Doherty adjourns the case to consider submissions. His verdict will be provided in writing at a later date.

Not today mate... Summary of all todays tweets... https://johnjamessite.wordpress.com/2015/11/12/the-elephant-in-the-room/

Hurting so so bad...

Yep, wasn't enough smilies for my liking, can almost taste your tears ya little c**t

@jamesdoleman Jonathan Brown, representing Green is "given the opportunity to have the last word" by Judge. The Court is told Green seeking funding for senior counsel, junior counsel, solicitors and any experts senior counsel wishes to call

Fivestars

Fivestars come out of hiding, to talk about emmmm Celtic fans Obsessed

@jamesdoleman Court now discussing timetable for forthcoming criminal case. Looks like all the fun for today, lots to talk about in there... Woolworths FC

Fivestarts is too busy dotting Vickys drivel... Im sure he will be along soon..

Grant Russell ‏@STVGrant 17m17 minutes ago CG lawyer: Difference between Rangers and Woolworths... Any Newco of Woolworths would have bought the undertaking. Not the personality.

Grant 4m4 minutes ago CG lawyer: One is trying to find out what the parties meant by Rangers Football Club

@jamesdoleman Brown says Rangers was "a basket of assets that could be sold," but these were not indivisible. Brown "What is the players went one way and the ground another, where is the "club" then.? Brown. "I realise that Rangers being the same club is a matter of life and death to some," James: Wouldn't be a proper legal case without "the elephant in the room" getting mentioned

CG lawyer: It's a leap, in the interest of continuity, that the parties in this contract did not intend to be involved in the act carrried on

James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 2m2 minutes ago Brown. "I realise that Rangers being the same club is a matter of life and death to some," Havin ago at tedi now, not on

James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 1m1 minute ago Brown "What is the players went one way and the ground another, where is the "club" then.?

@jamesdoleman! 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" "That is the business that is being carried on."

@Jamesdoleman Brown asks "What act did this club carry out, how and by whom was he [Green] appointed to this club, in what terms"

@jamesdoleman Brown Says a club is an "undertaking" of it's owners and as it "has neither capacity of personality" no-one can be CEO of it.

Dougal says go f**k yourself Vicky..

Jamesdoleman Brown moves on to Lord Nimmo Smith report to the SPL.

@jamesdoleman Brown says that there is a difference between the company and the business assets but not between a "club and a company" Brown "Sevco Scotland did not buy "the club" they bought the business and assets of the club"

"Brown says that there is a difference between the company and the business assets but not between a "club and a company"