Hearts & Partick Thistle vs SPFL Starts Today.

Snakehips said:
Have seen this argued both ways. One way is that once the vote is cast, ie sent, then that’s it. Finito. However the media reported it at the time as stating they had 28 days to change their mind, which was taken as gospel by most. However it was argued quite quickly afterwards that the 28 day period related to how much time they had to vote after circulation of the resolution before the option to vote Yes had lapsed, and that is only worthwhile if 75% agreement has not already been reached.

Still not 100% sure either way what is correct, as the 28 days part is made in a separate bulletin point within the resolution, not clear to someone like me who is not fluent in legal jargon. I would be inclined to take Point 2 as final and totally separate from Point 3, but I think that word ‘Unless’ at the start of Point 3 muddied the waters a little bit. It can be found here:-

The SPFL rules for voting on their resolution

www.followfollow.com www.followfollow.com
Click to expand...

See this is where it gets interesting, is it club or company.

Company law states a technical no vote (unsubmitted) as you dont submit a no vote can take 28 days to be submitted.

But the SPFL used their own adhoc system. They incurred a no tick box which is not normal.

Any submitted vote, cannot be changed. The motion fails aka Thistle QC.

Today the judge asked the promoted clubs QC what would happen if arbitration fails to satisfy the relegated clubs as the league has started!!

This is a ploy by the SPFL.. And the promoted clubs QC replied, the league would need to be halted!

This is a very good point by the judge. IMHO he has sounded out the SPFL over the timings. And knows it has been a time game (tactic). Time = pressure. And he may think that arbitration is of little use.

Also, the SPFL has indicated its a football matter to be resolved by football personnel. Yet they use ex legal heads to overlook.

Hearts QC has a night to get his case strengthened and to date there has been little evidence the petitioners have a losing case to fight against. The ball is in their court now, just dont go down stating a previous court ruling was wrong. Not a great way to attack.

Still think there is a strong chance the SFA might get a chance to resolve, but will hearts buckle? If not then let the public airing begin. Promotion clubs QC will not get his wish of a dismissive verdict. IMO

PS the judge asking spfl QC what had the governing body done on regards reconstruction, was also telling IMHO.
 
Carsons Army said:
See this is where it gets interesting, is it club or company.

Company law states a technical no vote (unsubmitted) as you dont submit a no vote can take 28 days to be submitted.

But the SPFL used their own adhoc system. They incurred a no tick box which is not normal.

Any submitted vote, cannot be changed. The motion fails aka Thistle QC.

Today the judge asked the promoted clubs QC what would happen if arbitration fails to satisfy the relegated clubs as the league has started!!

This is a ploy by the SPFL.. And the promoted clubs QC replied, the league would need to be halted!

This is a very good point by the judge. IMHO he has sounded out the SPFL over the timings. And knows it has been a time game (tactic). Time = pressure. And he may think that arbitration is of little use.

Also, the SPFL has indicated its a football matter to be resolved by football personnel. Yet they use ex legal heads to overlook.

Hearts QC has a night to get his case strengthened and to date there has been little evidence the petitioners have a losing case to fight against. The ball is in their court now, just dont go down stating a previous court ruling was wrong. Not a great way to attack.

Still think there is a strong chance the SFA might get a chance to resolve, but will hearts buckle? If not then let the public airing begin. Promotion clubs QC will not get his wish of a dismissive verdict. IMO

PS the judge asking spfl QC what had the governing body done on regards reconstruction, was also telling IMHO.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are more up to speed than me, which would not be hard!

I had earlier posted that I was quietly confident in this, and that was based mainly on the line of questioning taken by the judge, as you have mentioned. It seemed from these few queries alone that he may already have the SPFL’s card marked. That is what I am hoping anyway.

I don’t think the SPFL actually care about promotion or relegation, or even reconstruction, I think they just want it all done and dusted without any major impact on their positions or integrity being called into question by a judge, not to mention the Tims title award staying valid. Unfortunately I don’t think the whole process will be fully investigated, probably more to do with the timeframe we are in for 20/21, but I can’t see this going to the SFA, nor the SPFL winning any case.

Interesting though that both Hearts and Dundee Utd still appear to be planning for playing in the top league next year. Maybe there is more going on in the background than appears at face value.

From our POV, it would be ideal if the focus is on the actual vote, in that the original vote cast by Dundee was correct, and subsequently every action taken by the SPFL afterwards had no authority, including the awarding of titles.

No matter what happens, you would hope that a request for a vote of no confidence towards the SPFL Executive to be submitted at some point in the near future.
 
Snakehips said:
Sounds like you are more up to speed than me, which would not be hard!

I had earlier posted that I was quietly confident in this, and that was based mainly on the line of questioning taken by the judge, as you have mentioned. It seemed from these few queries alone that he may already have the SPFL’s card marked. That is what I am hoping anyway.

I don’t think the SPFL actually care about promotion or relegation, or even reconstruction, I think they just want it all done and dusted without any major impact on their positions or integrity being called into question by a judge, not to mention the Tims title award staying valid. Unfortunately I don’t think the whole process will be fully investigated, probably more to do with the timeframe we are in for 20/21, but I can’t see this going to the SFA, nor the SPFL winning any case.

Interesting though that both Hearts and Dundee Utd still appear to be planning for playing in the top league next year. Maybe there is more going on in the background than appears at face value.

From our POV, it would be ideal if the focus is on the actual vote, in that the original vote cast by Dundee was correct, and subsequently every action taken by the SPFL afterwards had no authority, including the awarding of titles.

No matter what happens, you would hope that a request for a vote of no confidence towards the SPFL Executive to be submitted at some point in the near future.
Click to expand...

trying to follow the best I can, gets confusing when its like two cases (SPFL) and (Promotion) against relegation.

Looks like Promotion QC defense is to have the petitioners case dismissed altogether from the courts. Stopping it dead whilst the SPFL seem to be leaning more to be sisted. And for the SFA to arbitrate.

Also not 100% sure but are the petitioners also demanding documents that would not be forwarded to them via arbitration? If granted then we may see a lot of clubs looking at our dossier and saying wow! Rangers called this right despite only 25% of clubs backing.

Think the judge maybe clued up on the case, think it was a clear indication when asking about the aid given to Hearts on reconstruction to the SPFL QC.
 
Disco Deejay said:
Why are so many people surprised that the SPFL are not challenging that they received the Dundee vote at 4:48pm?

As far as I'm aware, they have never disputed the fact that the vote was sent and received at that time. They have always admitted that the vote was received before 5pm, but claim that due to it being placed in quarantine by their server, the receipt of the email wasn't noticed until Fat Rod had the bright idea to check the Spam folder around 8pm.
Click to expand...
In a shit show of epic cluster / omni f*ck proportions, I realise the point that I’m about to make is a side issue but it highlights the systemic corruption and institutionalised incompetence of the entire affair in one perfect vignette - you’re about to conduct a vote amongst your member clubs that you’re perfectly well aware has the potential to destroy clubs, deepen entrenched enmity further still and cause unmitigated chaos for months to come yet, when the appointed hour comes and the incoming numbers don’t quite tally, it takes you almost THREE hours to check a spam folder? Almost three hours to work out how to count to a number that a child in P4 can count to? Eff me. The corporate failings, the moral failings, the governance failings, the literacy failings are multitudinous in this.
 
Coopers left foot. said:
Countersued for what exactly mate?
Click to expand...

There has been suggestions that if the season is delayed there will be clubs taking legal action against hearts for loss of earnings. Maybe it is just more threats but it is the nuclear option and hearts have already backed out of challenging celtic by saying they are not contesting the title being awarded, I just don’t see them taking that approach
 
JD1872 said:
There has been suggestions that if the season is delayed there will be clubs taking legal action against hearts for loss of earnings. Maybe it is just more threats but it is the nuclear option and hearts have already backed out of challenging celtic by saying they are not contesting the title being awarded, I just don’t see them taking that approach
Click to expand...

i dont see why hearts would give a shit about this.
 
JD1872 said:
There has been suggestions that if the season is delayed there will be clubs taking legal action against hearts for loss of earnings. Maybe it is just more threats but it is the nuclear option and hearts have already backed out of challenging celtic by saying they are not contesting the title being awarded, I just don’t see them taking that approach
Click to expand...
That's what Hearts and Thistle are already doing. I cant see how the cabal can successfully counter sue mate. They can threaten, but I reckon that would be laughed out of court.
 
TAFKA Earl C etc said:
In a shit show of epic cluster / omni f*ck proportions, I realise the point that I’m about to make is a side issue but it highlights the systemic corruption and institutionalised incompetence of the entire affair in one perfect vignette - you’re about to conduct a vote amongst your member clubs that you’re perfectly well aware has the potential to destroy clubs, deepen entrenched enmity further still and cause unmitigated chaos for months to come yet, when the appointed hour comes and the incoming numbers don’t quite tally, it takes you almost THREE hours to check a spam folder? Almost three hours to work out how to count to a number that a child in P4 can count to? Eff me. The corporate failings, the moral failings, the governance failings, the literacy failings are multitudinous in this.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, as soon as Dundee said that they had sent their vote in, it's not rocket science to check your Spam Folder immediately, if it isn't in your normal email folder.

The other possibility of course is that they received the Dundee vote and knew that it defeated the resolution, so they decided to put pressure on Nelms and after doing so thought, "right, how are we going to explain the change of vote." They then came up with the bright solution of a member of SPFL staff hitting the 'Mark As Spam' button and claiming non-receipt.

Which takes me back to Karyn McCluskey's open letter about the Deloitte investigation, " no evidence was found of improper behaviour by SPFL personnel concerning the submission of the Dundee FC vote." That statement is unnecessarily specific and doesn't cover evidence being found that a member of the SPFL deliberately placed the Dundee email in the Spam Folder after receipt.

I also found it interesting that Gerry Moynihan QC yesterday admitted that the Dundee FC vote had been received before 5pm, but apparently made no reference to it going into quarantine. Previously, they have been very quick to claim that no-one knew about the vote till just before 8pm, yet when in Court, quarantine was not mentioned. The cynic in me wonders why.
 
Last edited:
Anyone think that bungcaster and co are mad enough to try persuade(Brown envelope) the judge or whoever it is sitting in the chair?
 
Disco Deejay said:
Totally agree, as soon as Dundee said that they had sent their vote in, it's not rocket science to check your Spam Folder immediately, if it isn't in your normal email folder.

The other possibility of course is that they received the Dundee vote and knew that it defeated the resolution, so they decided to put pressure on Nelms and after doing so thought, "right, how are we going to explain the change of vote." They then came up with the bright solution of a member of SPFL staff hitting the 'Mark As Spam' button and claiming non-receipt.

Which takes me back to Karyn McCluskey's open letter about the Deloitte investigation, " no evidence was found of improper behaviour by SPFL personnel concerning the submission of the Dundee FC vote." That statement is unnecessarily specific and doesn't cover evidence being found that a member of the SPFL deliberately placed the Dundee email in the Spam Folder after receipt.

I also found it interesting that Gerry Moynihan QC yesterday admitted that the Dundee FC vote had been received before 5pm, but apparently made no reference to it going into quarantine. Previously, they have been very quick to claim that no-one knew about the vote till just before 8pm, yet when in Court, quarantine was not mentioned. The cynic in me wonders why.
Click to expand...
Disco Deejay said:
Totally agree, as soon as Dundee said that they had sent their vote in, it's not rocket science to check your Spam Folder immediately, if it isn't in your normal email folder.

The other possibility of course is that they received the Dundee vote and knew that it defeated the resolution, so they decided to put pressure on Nelms and after doing so thought, "right, how are we going to explain the change of vote." They then came up with the bright solution of a member of SPFL staff hitting the 'Mark As Spam' button and claiming non-receipt.

Which takes me back to Karyn McCluskey's open letter about the Deloitte investigation, " no evidence was found of improper behaviour by SPFL personnel concerning the submission of the Dundee FC vote." That statement is unnecessarily specific and doesn't cover evidence being found that a member of the SPFL deliberately placed the Dundee email in the Spam Folder after receipt.

I also found it interesting that Gerry Moynihan QC yesterday admitted that the Dundee FC vote had been received before 5pm, but apparently made no reference to it going into quarantine. Previously, they have been very quick to claim that no-one knew about the vote till just before 8pm, yet when in Court, quarantine was not mentioned. The cynic in me wonders why.
Click to expand...
If all else fails, surely this has to put the board back in the game re. the dundee vote, straight from the horses mouth, we can't let that lie
 
JD1872 said:
There has been suggestions that if the season is delayed there will be clubs taking legal action against hearts for loss of earnings. Maybe it is just more threats but it is the nuclear option and hearts have already backed out of challenging celtic by saying they are not contesting the title being awarded, I just don’t see them taking that approach
Click to expand...

If any legal action came from that, I'd expect it to be against the SPFL and not the two clubs. The two clubs have an entitlement to ensure the rules are applied fairly and legally and if they're not, then it's the ruling body who have caused any further hardship.

Simple really, apply the rules for all 42 clubs and we live happily ever after.
 
supersonic said:
Yeh mate I'd love to get stuck in the championship for years to come, wouldn't you? You realise if we played in England we would never win another trophy, unless you see us beating man city etc?
Click to expand...

I don't follow your thinking Supersonic. If ever we were to end up in the premiership, we would have some major financial clout or billionaire owners...or both. I know, I know, it all but a dream ;) :)
 
Carsons Army said:
See this is where it gets interesting, is it club or company.

Company law states a technical no vote (unsubmitted) as you dont submit a no vote can take 28 days to be submitted.

But the SPFL used their own adhoc system. They incurred a no tick box which is not normal.

Any submitted vote, cannot be changed. The motion fails aka Thistle QC.

Today the judge asked the promoted clubs QC what would happen if arbitration fails to satisfy the relegated clubs as the league has started!!

This is a ploy by the SPFL.. And the promoted clubs QC replied, the league would need to be halted!

This is a very good point by the judge. IMHO he has sounded out the SPFL over the timings. And knows it has been a time game (tactic). Time = pressure. And he may think that arbitration is of little use.

Also, the SPFL has indicated its a football matter to be resolved by football personnel. Yet they use ex legal heads to overlook.

Hearts QC has a night to get his case strengthened and to date there has been little evidence the petitioners have a losing case to fight against. The ball is in their court now, just dont go down stating a previous court ruling was wrong. Not a great way to attack.

Still think there is a strong chance the SFA might get a chance to resolve, but will hearts buckle? If not then let the public airing begin. Promotion clubs QC will not get his wish of a dismissive verdict. IMO

PS the judge asking spfl QC what had the governing body done on regards reconstruction, was also telling IMHO.
Click to expand...

Good summation mate, thanks.

On your post script point, is the governing body the SPFL or SFA?
 
Barrymoped said:
The lawyers put their arguments forward yesterday and will continue today when the judge will make a decision bet the case going forward in court or order Hearts and Partick to the SFA for arbitration on the matter.
Click to expand...
The thing about arbitration is there are 3 parties involved spfl/ sfa - hertz and thistle - and an independent arbitrator- all 3 must come to an agreeable solution, or its back to court - in this case a stalling process
 
Those that are asking why are hearts not saying this and that need to calm down. This episode is solely in regard to where the case will be heard. If the CoS is the correct route or whether it should be a football dispute and dealt with by the SFA via arbitration.

If CoS is taken the case to trial then documents will be released and we then get the popcorn out. The SPFL QC wants it closed shop via the SFA. If the Judge wants the trial to go ahead I still fear there will be dealings made regards executive powers as it will basically expose the corrupt cabal for what they are. They will be signing their own P45s. Due to timescales if the Hearts QC has had a good nights sleep and does not fck up then hopefully its game on.

Get the popcorn ready.
 
Gerry Moynihan QC: (from Faculty of Advocates website)

Biography

Gerry practises widely in civil litigation and appears frequently in courts at all levels.

He has acted as an arbiter and as chairman of the Police Appeals Tribunal. He acted as clerk to the Inquiry undertaken by Sir Anthony Campbell into the prosecution decisions relating to the murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar as well as being Senior Counsel to the Fingerprint Inquiry.

Interesting. Is this the arbiter the SFA would use?
 
joseph said:
The thing about arbitration is there are 3 parties involved spfl/ sfa - hertz and thistle - and an independent arbitrator- all 3 must come to an agreeable solution, or its back to court - in this case a stalling process
Click to expand...
That isn’t right. You are describing mediation, not arbitration. A decision of an arbitrator / arbiter is binding on the parties (typically subject to very limited right of appeal to the courts in the case of “manifest error”).
 
Hearts and Thistle must win this case or the game is all but done up here for good. The SPFL are already looking to get rid of member clubs even voting on important issues and allowing the SPFL Executive complete control. It'll be a dictatorship led by crooks, and nobody will be able to stop them.
 
EH47 said:
Can anybody summarise where we're at with this case?
Click to expand...

All, yesterday - and today - was about is whether the case should be heard at the CoS or be referred back to the SFA for arbitration. I see folk posting about the Judge should ask this or the Judge should ask that. The simple matter of fact is that the 'bones' of the case are not, and will not, be discussed. This is simply, at this stage, about who has best jurisdiction.

It might be thrown out altogether, it might be referred back to the SFA for final disposal or it might be referred back to the SFA with the option open to return to Court if they fail to resolve things satisfactorily.

1400hrs kick-off today.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
All, yesterday - and today - was about is whether the case should be heard at the CoS or be referred back to the SFA for arbitration. I see folk posting about the Judge should ask this or the Judge should ask that. The simple matter of fact is that the 'bones' of the case are not, and will not, be discussed. This is simply, at this stage, about who has best jurisdiction.

It might be thrown out altogether, it might be referred back to the SFA for final disposal or it might be referred back to the SFA with the option open to return to Court if they fail to resolve things satisfactorily.

1400hrs kick-off today.
Click to expand...

Don't Hearts have a gripe with the SFA, who along with the SPFL wrote lies to UEFA telling them that Scottish clubs wanted to end the season early, and before any vote was held by member clubs ? I don't know how the SFA could be seen as honest brokers.
 
Billiericky said:
Gerry Moynihan QC: (from Faculty of Advocates website)

Biography

Gerry practises widely in civil litigation and appears frequently in courts at all levels.

He has acted as an arbiter and as chairman of the Police Appeals Tribunal. He acted as clerk to the Inquiry undertaken by Sir Anthony Campbell into the prosecution decisions relating to the murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar as well as being Senior Counsel to the Fingerprint Inquiry.

Interesting. Is this the arbiter the SFA would use?
Click to expand...
No, he definitely would not be the arbiter. I think what was said in court yesterday was that it would be a three person arbitration panel, at least two of whom (not sure about the third) would come from a list of former (i.e. retired) Court of Session judges and Sheriffs. One of those would also chair the panel. The parties would look to mutually agree the identity of the arbitration panel members. Whilst I think it is undoubtedly the case that we would prefer the case to play out in Court rather than via arbitration, I do at least take some degree of comfort from the fact that an arbitration panel led by a former judge rather than by "football people" ought not to be a total stitch up (I know there will be others who will be much more cynical about an arbitration panel than I am however).
 
Disco Deejay said:
Totally agree, as soon as Dundee said that they had sent their vote in, it's not rocket science to check your Spam Folder immediately, if it isn't in your normal email folder.

The other possibility of course is that they received the Dundee vote and knew that it defeated the resolution, so they decided to put pressure on Nelms and after doing so thought, "right, how are we going to explain the change of vote." They then came up with the bright solution of a member of SPFL staff hitting the 'Mark As Spam' button and claiming non-receipt.

Which takes me back to Karyn McCluskey's open letter about the Deloitte investigation, " no evidence was found of improper behaviour by SPFL personnel concerning the submission of the Dundee FC vote." That statement is unnecessarily specific and doesn't cover evidence being found that a member of the SPFL deliberately placed the Dundee email in the Spam Folder after receipt.

I also found it interesting that Gerry Moynihan QC yesterday admitted that the Dundee FC vote had been received before 5pm, but apparently made no reference to it going into quarantine. Previously, they have been very quick to claim that no-one knew about the vote till just before 8pm, yet when in Court, quarantine was not mentioned. The cynic in me wonders why.
Click to expand...
Your original observation with regards to the language used was both startlingly astute and a good pointer to all observers of the sleight of hand at play. Great spot.
 
Reading the transcript it shows to me at least, that the cabal had planned that things could go this far and shows how rooted in bed they are with the rats. Going to be a tough slog but I hope Hearts at least get the chance to inflict some bloody noses
 
bearspakora said:
Why did the SPFL lie to cash starved member clubs having one option only to end the season before funds could be released ?

Why did both the SPFL and SFA write to UEFA to claim that member clubs wanted to end the season before any such vote had taken place ?

Case closed.
Click to expand...
Word play again the SPFL stated it was the only way to release "end of season payments" The SPFL didn't offer to "advance " clubs money.
 
okbear said:
If any legal action came from that, I'd expect it to be against the SPFL and not the two clubs. The two clubs have an entitlement to ensure the rules are applied fairly and legally and if they're not, then it's the ruling body who have caused any further hardship.

Simple really, apply the rules for all 42 clubs and we live happily ever after.
Click to expand...

If the SPFL had done things properly, the promoted clubs would be looking forward to the next season. The SPFL did not. They have caused all this. And if the promoted clubs dont get promoted they should be looking at the SPFL not Hearts or Thistle.
 
Virgil Hilts said:
The Judge, should be asking one fućking question:

Rangers offered to pay for an Independent Inquiry into the whole affair, and the paid SPFL e ex’s lobbied against it, WHY?

Judge might support Paed fc, so I won’t hold my breath.
Click to expand...

The judge won’t ask that question because neither side will include it in their submissions. He will be focussed solely on points of law.
 
ald said:
No, he definitely would not be the arbiter. I think what was said in court yesterday was that it would be a three person arbitration panel, at least two of whom (not sure about the third) would come from a list of former (i.e. retired) Court of Session judges and Sheriffs. One of those would also chair the panel. The parties would look to mutually agree the identity of the arbitration panel members. Whilst I think it is undoubtedly the case that we would prefer the case to play out in Court rather than via arbitration, I do at least take some degree of comfort from the fact that an arbitration panel led by a former judge rather than by "football people" ought not to be a total stitch up (I know there will be others who will be much more cynical about an arbitration panel than I am however).
Click to expand...

Arbitration means Hearts, Court, or the public dont get to see the evidence. Done via CoS and the dirty linen gets hung out.

SPFL is desperate for Arbitration.
 
bearspakora said:
Don't Hearts have a gripe with the SFA, who along with the SPFL wrote lies to UEFA telling them that Scottish clubs wanted to end the season early, and before any vote was held by member clubs ? I don't know how the SFA could be seen as honest brokers.
Click to expand...

I suspect they undoubtedly will, and may well make that point this afternoon. However, it won't make any difference because the line will be that the SFA will appoint an 'independent' panel to hear the case. Whether that will be at the level of Lord Nimmo Smith as it was in our case I have no idea. Yesterday and today were never going to see any of the SPFL/SFA 'dirty linen' aired in public. This is but a preliminary skirmish - though if Hearts lose, and it does go the the SFA, then it will be a significant blow for their case.
 
Coopers left foot. said:
That's what Hearts and Thistle are already doing. I cant see how the cabal can successfully counter sue mate. They can threaten, but I reckon that would be laughed out of court.
Click to expand...
If an interdict was granted then it's enforced by the court. Hearts, nor anybody else, can unilaterally enforce a delay to the new season.

If an interdict was to be granted it would be because the court agree with hearts arguments. There is no chance of them being counter sued.
 
Carsons Army said:
Arbitration means Hearts, Court, or the public dont get to see the evidence. Done via CoS and the dirty linen gets hung out.

SPFL is desperate for Arbitration.
Click to expand...
Good point. Court proceedings would certainly be played out in public. I suspect an arbitration wouldn't although the report of the arbiter may come out (by leak or otherwise).

I am interested to hear the discussion which I think is scheduled to take place towards the end of the hearing this afternoon as regards "commission and diligence" (i.e. what I think must be an application by Hearts and Thistle to recover documents etc. from the SPFL). Nobody knows if there is any sort of "smoking gun" within the SPFL's paper work, but recovery of documents is always interesting. Some documents will no doubt be protected by legal privilege and won't be recoverable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top