cmontheloknow Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 3 hours ago, Have some faith in Magic said: Brechin were in the same situation as Hamilton, Queen of the South and Forfar. Haven't heard any screaming for them to be relegated. The SPFL withdrew them from a play off (with no right to do so as it was an SFA competition) and denied two league winners the chance of promotion. Slight difference. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 5 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: If there is a championship to take a stint in All will come to he who waits 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 1 minute ago, Pet Jeden said: You saying specific implement can never be applied in relation to company decisions? Well if that's right, I suppose setting aside the original decision would have the same effect? Try that again, as what you wrote doesn't really make sense. However, if I was to try and decipher what you mean, If you look at the Ranger's dossier it's all down to contract law and corporate governance. As for "setting aside" the original decision, where I guess you are referring to the Dundee 'tipped' vote the issue there would again be based on contract law. As teams enter a contract with the SPFL, the regulations that the contract is based upon would decree whether the SPFL can "undo" such decisions without a mandate from a suitable number of clubs. Considering the amount you have posted on this, I really would have thought this would be fairly obvious to you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Nation Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 5 minutes ago, Ric said: As teams enter a contract with the SPFL, the regulations that the contract is based upon would decree whether the SPFL can "undo" such decisions without a mandate from a suitable number of clubs. Contract law doesn't apply, as there is no such contract. The SPFL is a limited company, and the 42 clubs are its shareholders. The applicable rules are the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the company 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pet Jeden Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 49 minutes ago, Green Day said: Is the assumption that this is a criminal or a civil matter? Civil , you would thnk. But if it’s Companies Act stuff? Dunno. Ask Ric, he’s the college law lecturer 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffo Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 Is this shite still dragging on? Get Budge to f**k and usher in our procession to Championship glory! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 @Pet Jeden. You have lost me. Can you tell me what Hearts would be going to court about? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 Rangers were. But the point is the board do have responsibilities.Rangers didn't submit a competent resolution. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 Hearts in court would be great to see, I’m all for it.It’ll cost them a fortune in legal fees, they’ll be given a dressing down by the judge and be comprehensively defeated.It will be the latest in a long line of humiliations, on and off the park. To think that the law courts are going to have an interest in the internal workings of a member organisation. Man alive, what an entertaining waste of everyone’s time. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venti Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 1 hour ago, Jacksgranda said: His arse? Kenneth Williams has more of a beak than a mouth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 He certainly had very prominent nostrils 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Lex said: Hearts in court would be great to see, I’m all for it. It’ll cost them a fortune in legal fees, they’ll be given a dressing down by the judge and be comprehensively defeated. It will be the latest in a long line of humiliations, on and off the park. To think that the law courts are going to have an interest in the internal workings of a member organisation. Man alive, what an entertaining waste of everyone’s time. But the house conveyancer said they would have a case under Common Law Edited May 29, 2020 by invergowrie arab 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 59 minutes ago, Stag Nation said: Contract law doesn't apply, as there is no such contract. The SPFL is a limited company, and the 42 clubs are its shareholders. The applicable rules are the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the company Then I stand corrected, then, as I was under the impression the clubs entered into a contract rather than acted as shareholders. If that is the case I'm still unsure as to what legal mechanism could be used to force a team to play in a certain league. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 1 hour ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: It’s not “arrogance” when one genuinely is superior That’s what I keep telling people! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishBhoy Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 I’ve always been under the impression that UEFA take a very dim view of individual clubs taking their association to court. Is this a different matter because it’s the league Hearts grievance is with, rather than the SFA? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coventry Saint Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 21 minutes ago, Ric said: Then I stand corrected, then, as I was under the impression the clubs entered into a contract rather than acted as shareholders. If that is the case I'm still unsure as to what legal mechanism could be used to force a team to play in a certain league. I'm pretty sure it's a bluff and that the threat if the hassle and expense involved from the SPFL's point of view is the so-called incentive. Sadly, despite what Hearts believe, the SPFL can't control the vote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said: I'm pretty sure it's a bluff and that the threat if the hassle and expense involved from the SPFL's point of view is the so-called incentive. Sadly, despite what Hearts believe, the SPFL can't control the vote. I'm happy to admit I'm wrong when I am, and I'm clearly wrong on the contract/company situation. Although I do agree that it's a threat in order to gain compensation and some sort of moral victory. Just think of the fun if reconstruction goes through and they are sitting bottom again next season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 9 minutes ago, Ric said: to force a team to play in a certain league. The SPFL have 42 clubs with different needs it's not about forcing any club into a certain league it's all about what is feasible and practical. The top flight seem to be gearing up for a august the 1st start BCD's , it would be interesting to see how many clubs can't do that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybeee Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 5 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said: I see, you were explaining what everyone except Hearts and Falkirk supporters have understood since day one. Thanks. Can you now explain how Celtic won the league? Yes............ possibly something to do with size of fan-base >>> leading to a higher income than most other clubs compounded by the distinct lack of another team with similar financial clout. Of course the fact that their financial superiority allows the signing of better than average players may well have something to do with it .................. just possibly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted May 29, 2020 Share Posted May 29, 2020 I’ve always been under the impression that UEFA take a very dim view of individual clubs taking their association to court. Is this a different matter because it’s the league Hearts grievance is with, rather than the SFA? I thought the same, but the league is different. I would imagine that Hearts are expecting that the SFA will step in to resolve the dispute prior to court proceedings. 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.