Article Judge throws out contempt of court case against Rangers Chairman Dave King

Der Berliner said:
The Hon Lady Wolffe (Sarah Wolffe QC)
The Hon Lady Wolffe was appointed a Judge of the Supreme Courts in March 2014.

Lady Wolffe qualified as a solicitor in 1992 and worked at the Bank of Scotland legal department from 1992 to 1993. She called to the bar in 1994 and until 2008 practised as a junior counsel, mainly in commercial and public law. From 1996 until 2008 she was also standing junior counsel to the Department of Trade and Industry and its successor departments. Since 2007 she has been an ad hoc advocate depute. She was appointed QC in 2008. As senior counsel she has practised mainly in commercial and public law. She was a member of the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Faculty of Advocates 2005-2008 and has been a member of the Police Appeals Tribunal since 2013. Mrs Wolffe emigrated to the United Kingdom in 1987.

http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/34/1246/The-Hon-Lady-Wolffe-(Sarah-Wolffe-QC)
Click to expand...


Also married to the current Lord Advocate, James Wolffe
 
Douglas Fraser bbc last month quote " Friday: At a procedural hearing, Dave King's lawyer agrees to pass on the message that the Ibrox chairman better sort this soon, or he'll face a contempt of court hearing. Potential penalties for failure to comply with a court ruling include jail."
 
George Goudie said:
What's that Queersie?

Your hungry?

ddkjfb.gif


Fúck off twat.
Click to expand...
That's brilliant I canny even post a picture ffs
#oldbassaloyal
 
scottie626 said:
Douglas Fraser bbc last month quote " Friday: At a procedural hearing, Dave King's lawyer agrees to pass on the message that the Ibrox chairman better sort this soon, or he'll face a contempt of court hearing. Potential penalties for failure to comply with a court ruling include jail."
Click to expand...
Marstonbear FF quote Aug 2018 "Douglas Fraser, stop talking shit"
 
I won’t lie, there’s so many court cases with DK and our club that I don’t know what one means from the other.

The main one that matters is regarding the merchandise!
 
The postponement to the case comes just two days after Rangers announced a general meeting for August 31 to approve the issue of new shares.

Eh? First Ive heard of this?
 
scottie626 said:
Douglas Fraser bbc last month quote " Friday: At a procedural hearing, Dave King's lawyer agrees to pass on the message that the Ibrox chairman better sort this soon, or he'll face a contempt of court hearing. Potential penalties for failure to comply with a court ruling include jail."
Click to expand...
Goan yerself Dave, GIRFUT. :);):)
 
People should realise it's two different cases. Even if DK etc get enough shares to make the TP action unnecessary to offer to buy all the shares, the TP may still pursue King for failing to attempt to buy the shares when ordered.
I think they'll let it slide.
 
Fúck off twat.[/QUOTE]
Okay GG, I’ve liked the gif twice now but I’ll ask again for one of King kicking Spiers in the haw-maws.
 
I particularly liked this bit!

"It looks as though the Takeover Panel are the latest to discover that Mr King doesn’t respond well to being bullied."

Gawn yersel' Dave!
:):):)
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Paperwork isn't out yet mate. Should arrive next week I'd expect. All the details are on the official site.
Click to expand...
Awesome cheers. I've got rabid cunts next door and the useless postie often puts my mail in their house despite repeated complaints from me. Just wanted to be sure incase they cunts had the paperwork for this.
 
TommyEgan said:
Awesome cheers. I've got rabid cunts next door and the useless postie often puts my mail in their house despite repeated complaints from me. Just wanted to be sure incase they cunts had the paperwork for this.
Click to expand...
If your local delivery office is handy for you,i'd contact them to hold your mail back so that u can collect it yourself.
 
Arminius said:
And if my reading of the earlier discussion is correct, the share issue planned for 31st August 2018 will effectively render this entire nonsense irrelevant.

Don't mess with the King :D
Click to expand...
Can the share issue still go ahead if this is just postponed, is he allowed to dilute the holding of the concert party to below 30%, as a shareholder myself I can’t recall having been sent any documents as yet! :confused::oops::eek:
 
WATP said:
Can the share issue still go ahead if this is just postponed, is he allowed to dilute the holding of the concert party to below 30%, as a shareholder myself I can’t recall having been sent any documents as yet! :confused::oops::eek:
Click to expand...

Firstly, documents not been delivered yet.

Secondly, the extra shares the 'concert party' guys are buying will leave them at exactly the same percentage shareholding as they were before. Clever, eh?​
 
Unsure of the tone of your reply mate, maybe just not reading how you meant it....hopefully anyway?

I intend to maintain my own shareholding % too as does my old boy, but I was thinking there must be a plan to dilute the % of those within the concert party with other invited wealthy Bears by reading the original post i replied to. If they did do that the TAB can’t apply their greater than 30% rule any longer!!
Valley Bluenose said:
Firstly, documents not been delivered yet.

Secondly, the extra shares the 'concert party' guys are buying will leave them at exactly the same percentage shareholding as they were before. Clever, eh?​
Click to expand...
 
WATP said:
Unsure of the tone of your reply mate, maybe just not reading how you meant it....hopefully anyway?

I intend to maintain my own shareholding % too as does my old boy, but I was thinking there must be a plan to dilute the % of those within the concert party with other invited wealthy Bears by reading the original post i replied to. If they did do that the TAB can’t apply their greater than 30% rule any longer!!
Click to expand...

Wasn't having a go at all.o_O

The idea is that, for example, before this share issue 50% of existing shareholders need to accept the King 'concert party' offer to make it enforceable. Lets say the 'bad guys' had 25% - they only needed another 25% to make it enforceable. After this share issue, because there are more shares in circulation, they still need 50% to make it enforceable but their shareholding has dropped down from the previous 25% to, lets say, 15%. Therefore they need not 25% but 35% of other shareholders to support them in order to make it enforceable.

King will go to Court/TP and say 'look there is no way 50% are going to accept the concert party offer so lets scrap it'. Common sense says the Court/TP will agree. Nevertheless, if they don't, they can still make him go ahead with the offer regardless of what percentage King and the others own after the proposed share issue.

That's all a bit vague but hopefully understandable.

Apologies if first response sounded 'iffy'.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Wasn't having a go at all.o_O

The idea is that, for example, before this share issue 50% of existing shareholders need to accept the King 'concert party' offer to make it enforceable. Lets say the 'bad guys' had 25% - they only needed another 25% to make it enforceable. After this share issue, because there are more shares in circulation, they still need 50% to make it enforceable but their shareholding has dropped down from the previous 25% to, lets say, 15%. Therefore they need not 25% but 35% of other shareholders to support them in order to make it enforceable.

King will go to Court/TP and say 'look there is no way 50% are going to accept the concert party offer so lets scrap it'. Common sense says the Court/TP will agree. Nevertheless, if they don't, they can still make him go ahead with the offer regardless of what percentage King and the others own after the proposed share issue.

That's all a bit vague but hopefully understandable.

Apologies if first response sounded 'iffy'.
Click to expand...
No worries....Sounds good news all round then, also good that Club 1872 can maintain its % too as i and my old boy contribute monthly to that also. WATP
 
Most of this stuff goes way above my head,I just get the wife to explain it to me in laymans terms. Asked her about this latest yesterday and shes just got back to me with this

Very hard to predict what the final outcome will be without knowing the the finer details and what the 'technicality' is.
In theory ToP could block Resolution 11 from going ahead until the matter is settled. Alternatively they could petition the court under Section 18 of the Companies Act at a later date. That in itself is a complex issue
It's been a while since I've been involved in shares and acquisitions but ToP don't generally just go away but they're in uncharted waters here. DK and his legal team may have found a loophole especially since the option of cold-shouldering isn't available to them (ToP). If they have, then they might just have set a legal precedent for future cases.
Will be interesting to hear what the technicality is though :)

Don't shoot the messenger :) shoot the wife :cool: :D
 
Baloo_the_Bear said:
Don't shoot the messenger :) shoot the wife :cool: :D
Click to expand...

We're not doing your dirty work for you. Do it yourself (and then hire King's legal team!)

Interesting points from her in terms of what might happen next.

With us, it's never a clear as "thrown out" and that's it. There's always a second stage but by and large, the board seem capable of dealing with these things.
 
Laudrup1 said:
We're not doing your dirty work for you. Do it yourself (and then hire King's legal team!)

Interesting points from her in terms of what might happen next.

With us, it's never a clear as "thrown out" and that's it. There's always a second stage but by and large, the board seem capable of dealing with these things.
Click to expand...

And for this, there is no-one else I'd want at the helm of Rangers than Dave King. He is a master of the dark arts and the embodiment of "no surrender".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top