bennett Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Legal ramifications? The burden of proof would be on Rangers with each of the 5 loan players cases whilst possibly being heard jointly would be judged separately ......do they have the money to throw at yet more legal fees? "The buyer beware" is the legal maxim that springs to mind......I'm sure that's why Rangers backpeddled from suing Atletico Madrid over signing Prodan. Are you trying to replace Hellboy? Anyhow I read that as uncle mike and chums may have broken some regulations in their dealings. . .. But like most people I'm not really clued up on the legal side of things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 That article looks really legitimate densboy.... -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Are you trying to replace Hellboy? Anyhow I read that as uncle mike and chums may have broken some regulations in their dealings. . .. But like most people I'm not really clued up on the legal side of things. How could anyone replace P&B's very own John Grisham?! My OP is purely based from the Contract law I do know in relation to "burden of proof". What regs have MA & Co broken? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 How could anyone replace P&B's very own John Grisham?! My OP is purely based from the Contract law I do know in relation to "burden of proof". What regs have MA & Co broken? That's how I read klaxons tweet, that's all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I hope Dingwall not only loses the case but as a result, everything he holds dear. A wholly repugnant individual. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I find it amusing how the Orcs are constantly hoping that Mike Ashley has slipped up somewhere and can be kicked out on a legal technicality of some sort. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I find it amusing how the Orcs are constantly hoping that Mike Ashley has slipped up somewhere and can be kicked out on a legal technicality of some sort. They're hoping Ashley has done a Rangers and made a c**t of it somewhere. Sadly for them, he's watertight 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobles Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Struggling to figure out what the **** are. All options barring **** will not fit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 On the loanees, the player said he could still play in England and it was due to different rules in Scotland which hints at a lack of diligence on the part of Sevco but if the player was ok to play in England was the question asked anyway. We, yes lowly Morton signed Tidser in January and he was ineligible due to him already playing for different clubs, ok there were some feeble excuses but we fecked up and we are paying the player until the end of the season, so these things occur, although it was met with much amusement by others in the seaside leagues. This appears to be a non-issue being used to create another conspiracy theory. I was sceptical about the loanees but if these guys are on about £1K a week and the total quoted in some newspapers as £65K Vuckic is probably worth that given his goals and general play, the guy Streete pulled up on his first game but he must have been fit and unfortunately (depending on your perspective) suffered an injury, Given Sevco are losing around £1.5 million a month the £65k was probably worth a punt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiddy Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Honolulu Which one? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Koop Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I find it amusing how the Orcs are constantly hoping that Mike Ashley has slipped up somewhere and can be kicked out on a legal technicality of some sort. They need a superhero to come to the rescue. Calling Diamond Dan! Calling Diamond Dan! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 First Chris Graham makes an epic c**t of himself and now Dingwall is about to be squished by Ashley's lawyers,,it's a bad year for the Rangers keyboard bigots, but this is what happens when the internet racist bigots actually start believing their virtual reality personas. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crùbag Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 First Chris Graham makes an epic c**t of himself and now Dingwall is about to be squished by Ashley's lawyers,,it's a bad year for the Rangers keyboard bigots, but this is what happens when the internet racist bigots actually start believing their virtual reality personas. Turns out that the line about internet bampots, was right after all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 First Chris Graham makes an epic c**t of himself and now Dingwall is about to be squished by Ashley's lawyers,,it's a bad year for the Rangers keyboard bigots, but this is what happens when the internet racist bigots actually start believing their virtual reality personas. What has he done now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 First Chris Graham makes an epic c**t of himself and now Dingwall is about to be squished by Ashley's lawyers,,it's a bad year for the Rangers keyboard bigots, but this is what happens when the internet racist bigots actually start believing their virtual reality personas. Could Dingwall not be the fans rep on the board ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accietilleyedye Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 What has he done now? Sports Direct have taken the outrageous decision to take a shareholder to court because he asked to see the share register. Rangers fan Mark Dingwall bought a single share in Sports Direct International and then requested a copy of their share register. Their company secretary replied asking why he wanted the register and Dingwall explained: Mr Cameron Olsen, The Company Secretary, Sports Direct International, Monday 16 February 2015 Dear Mr Olsen, Thank you for your letter of the 9th February requesting me to explain the purpose of my request to obtain the shareholders register. As you will be aware, Section 116 of the Companies Act enables a shareholder to request a copy of the company’s register of members where this constitutes a proper purpose. As a shareholder I am concerned over the bad publicity the company has been receiving over its use of zero hours contracts and the retail agreements in place with RIFC plc which have also caused a large amount of detrimental publicity which may damage the share price. I wish to canvass my fellow shareholders as to whether they would be willing to support resolutions to end the use of zero hours contracts and to review the terms of the retail agreements with RIFC plc to ensure that these generate sales revenue that benefits shareholders; rather than the current agreements which whilst appearing to be favourable are generating low sales volumes due to the level of hostility amongst the public to what are viewed as unfair terms. I look forward to receiving the register so that I can canvass my fellow shareholders to ensure that we are able to ensure that the business does not continue to be involved in contracts which damage the long term interests of shareholders. Regarding the requested fee of £65, my understanding is that as a member of the company, under Section 116, that this information should be available for free. I have laid out the appropriate section below: Section 116 Rights to inspect and require copies (1) The register and the index of members’ names must be open to the inspection— . (a) of any member of the company without charge, and . If my understanding is incorrect, or the company feels this is too great a financial encumbrance, then I will, of course, send a cheque subject to your advice. I would prefer the copy of the register to be in electronic form. Yours sincerely, MARK DINGWALL That very same day the Sport Direct lawyers made an application to the Companies Court in London seeking the following – 1/ That the Claimant shall not comply with the request of Mr Mark Dingwall by letter dated 3 February 2015 for a a copy of the Claimant’s register of members. 2/ That they “shall not comply with any future request (whether made by Mark Dingwall or any other person) to inspect the Claimant’s register of members or for a copy of that register where the only purpose given for the request is to enable members to be contacted, without identifying the subject matter and purpose of such contact: 3/ Mark Dingwall do pay the Claimant’s costs, such costs to be assessed if not agreed. The hearing is set for 11.30 on 14th April. Mark Dingwall writes: ‘I can understand a company not wishing to hand out it’s share register willy-nilly but the principle is that sensible shareholders dis-satisfied with the performance of a company should be able to seek out other shareholders and canvass their opinions. In my original request I undertook not to share the register with anyone else and not to contact the shareholders regarding anything other than the company’s affairs. By moving to strike out my request; and specifically to set the precedent that neither I nor any other shareholder can in the future obtain a copy of the register; Sports Direct are seeking to remove one vital right whereby shareholders can seek to enforce their rights by lobbying other investors in the company. I have had some free advice so far but with the 14th April looming I think engaging a lawyer would be the sensible way to go. FF.com exists on a hand to mouth basis – we have no rich and mysterious backers nor plentiful sources of income. If we can settle outside of court or are otherwise successful then the balance will, of course, be donated to charitable causes after consultation with the donors.’ http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/03/sports-direct-take-legal-action-against-shareholder-who-asked-to-see-share-register/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 What has he done now? The stupid fat bigot thought he could pull a flanker on one of the richest men in the world, and Ashleys lawyers have just slapped their dicks off his face and now hes begging rangers fans to back him financially...agaisnt one of the richest men in the world...what a Tedi. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Struggling to figure out what the **** are. All options barring **** will not fit **** 0 Quote Link to comment 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.