Ruling On Latest Fat Mike Court Case – Still Waiting...

Boydscores

Well-Known Member
Currently there is no deal, his argument is he got matching rights for 2 years, we accept we breached that deal, that deal is dead and we were told to get on with forming a new deal. But.. Ashley argued at the end of two years they would have right to match again indefinitely but a Judge has already shot that down. Now we are at a stage of whether a Judge decides Rangers pay some form of compensation and the parties go their own way or he is going to make Rangers give Ashley his two years, but I doubt Sports Direct see any value in that as Hummel refuse to send them stock.. they asked the Court to ask Rangers to do what they could to make Hummel send them stock and the Court erupted in to laughter at that request as it was desperate and not something a Judge could force Rangers to do.. so what worth would a 2 year deal be with nothing to sell?
I go back to my Theory. The Rangers don't currently have a retail deal. Hummel sell our merchandise to Elite who sell it in tens of thousands. Hummel pay The Rangers a
" Compensatory " sum to sponsor Auchenhowie?
 
Currently there is no deal, his argument is he got matching rights for 2 years, we accept we breached that deal, that deal is dead and we were told to get on with forming a new deal. But.. Ashley argued at the end of two years they would have right to match again indefinitely but a Judge has already shot that down. Now we are at a stage of whether a Judge decides Rangers pay some form of compensation and the parties go their own way or he is going to make Rangers give Ashley his two years, but I doubt Sports Direct see any value in that as Hummel refuse to send them stock.. they asked the Court to ask Rangers to do what they could to make Hummel send them stock and the Court erupted in to laughter at that request as it was desperate and not something a Judge could force Rangers to do.. so what worth would a 2 year deal be with nothing to sell?
So why is this fat %^*& fighting us so much? He isn’t stupid so what’s his endgame? I find it hard to believe that it’s just to %^*& with King, additionally, like you said, he’ll literally have nothing of ours to sell as Hummel quite rightly are telling him to piss off.

What am I missing here? o_O
 

BrownBrogues

Well-Known Member
So why is this fat %^*& fighting us so much? He isn’t stupid so what’s his endgame? I find it hard to believe that it’s just to %^*& with King, additionally, like you said, he’ll literally have nothing of ours to sell as Hummel quite rightly are telling him to piss off.

What am I missing here? o_O
His reputation of bulldozing anything standing in his way. It’s not about getting as much money as he can.
 

Fatbearblue

Administrator
Staff member
No, and I don’t believe anyone does. if it’s reserved for written Judgement then I don’t believe anyone will be aware of what will be in his decision. But I can’t see him forcing the two parties to continue to work together. I suspect we will be due to pay the contract breach cap of £1M plus the Costs and some other losses, but I also believe SD will be in breach for failing to release the funds due under the deal to end the 7 year notice contract. When one is off set against the other I think the whole thing may cost us £2-3M. But purely just my opinion based on sitting in on Civil Court cases preciously.
Why did you sit preciously, where you pissed off about something?
 

BrownBrogues

Well-Known Member
Why did you sit preciously, where you pissed off about something?
I was in Insurance for 20 Years and handled Professional indemnity and legal expenses insurance matters. Court for civil disputes were a weekly occurrence. You get a sense for what Judges do and do not want to hear. They also don’t want Companies troubling their Courts with matters, I think due to the volume of litigation between the parties that he won’t force an unworkable partnership as it’s only going to end up back in front of them. There comes a point where they feel enough is enough and give the parties a dressing down. Previously lol sorry that was meant to be previously lol.
 

Fatbearblue

Administrator
Staff member
I was in Insurance for 20 Years and handled Professional indemnity and legal expenses insurance matters. Court for civil disputes were a weekly occurrence. You get a sense for what Judges do and do not want to hear. They also don’t want Companies troubling their Courts with matters, I think due to the volume of litigation between the parties that he won’t force an unworkable partnership as it’s only going to end up back in front of them. There comes a point where they feel enough is enough and give the parties a dressing down. Previously lol sorry that was meant to be previously lol.
I was being funny mate, I think you meant to say where I have sat previously and you've typed preciously.
 

The Shadow

Well-Known Member
Hopefully this will get sorted out once and for all in this ruling

Even if it is 2-3 times the quoted $1m compo, it will be worth it to clean up what I believe is the last loose end from the spiv years?
 

Brant Hurley

Well-Known Member
I'm baffled by the compensation levels people are suggesting (even the ones who are clearly taking the piss)

SDI have no intention of ever selling Rangers shirts.

Their only motive is to ensure no one does.

they are not in this to take the gravy from anyone other than RFC.
UK compensation is proportionate to projected actual financial loss. No exemplary damages are due. Any award may be further eroded if the bench recognises we fans had no intention of buying SDI tat
 

Southside_shug

Well-Known Member
UK compensation is proportionate to projected actual financial loss. No exemplary damages are due. Any award may be further eroded if the bench recognises we fans had no intention of buying SDI tat

You have got it the wrong way.

SDI have no intention of selling Rangers gear. That's the reason we are in and out of court all the time
 

Arkanoid

Well-Known Member
So why is this fat %^*& fighting us so much? He isn’t stupid so what’s his endgame? I find it hard to believe that it’s just to %^*& with King, additionally, like you said, he’ll literally have nothing of ours to sell as Hummel quite rightly are telling him to piss off.

What am I missing here? o_O
Purely personal, he had his grubby hands around the throat of our club. He thought he had our club, Albion Car park, Edminston House, HTC, Ibrox our retail the lot.
Don't forget he tried to get our chairman the jail over Christmas, this personal vindictive poison from Ashley should never be underestimated in all this.
 

dublinbluenose

Well-Known Member
Purely personal, he had his grubby hands around the throat of our club. He thought he had our club, Albion Car park, Edminston House, HTC, Ibrox our retail the lot.
Don't forget he tried to get our chairman the jail over Christmas, this personal vindictive poison from Ashley should never be underestimated in all this.
He was so used to getting his own way it would have come as a thunderbolt when King out manouvered him and forced his placemen out of the boardroom and loosened his grip on the club.he propably hates our support as he found out we weren’t Newcastle and he must have lost a sizable sum with rangers jerseys collecting dust in sports direct warehouses as we refused to but them from him.
 

Laudrup1

Well-Known Member
I would hazard a guess that was David Murray talking utter shite.
Yup. "We realised they were going to asset strip this and sell of that..." was his quote.

Nothing other than Murray bullshit.

It was, strangely, also the very thing Murray had done to us for years with our retail deals being thrown to JJB and catering flounced through his son's firm for profits.

lady's front bottom of a man and I wish him nothing but ill will.
 

trueblue77

Well-Known Member
Been too many coincidences.
True, and not really a sufficient explanation for why he took the approach he did. ie. alienate himself from the support and look to profit from us at a time when we were at our lowest ebb. It's never made any sense to me. A man with billions in his pocket too ? I don't get it.
 
I'm baffled by the compensation levels people are suggesting (even the ones who are clearly taking the piss)

SDI have no intention of ever selling Rangers shirts.

Their only motive is to ensure no one does.

they are not in this to take the gravy from anyone other than RFC.
In regards to the level of compensation. Surely Rangers would refer the court to the previous 2 seasons merchandise money (before Hummel became involved).

These would be the figures the court would be working with.

I don't imagine SD where making much of a profit at all considering nobody was buying anything.

That's the profit they will be claiming for.

Talk of 8million plus is just timmy nonsense.
 
Ask Mike Ashley what he was talking to Craig Whyte about the night Radio Suzie McGuire was assaulted by her Ex at the same party. McGuire gave testimony the two were present at that party.
Scottish TV interviewed CW outside the hilton hotel that day in 2011 did they not ? his first public confirmation of taking over RFC i think i'm right in saying.
 

Marty101

Well-Known Member
I've been checking the English case report websites every now and again, and there's still no sign of a judgment here. I think if it was just a case of a final judgment having been given to the parties but withheld from publication for a period it would probably have been released by now.

One thing that should maybe be kept in mind is that the judgment fixing the "speedy trial" confirmed that the question of damages was being put on hold pending the outcome of the "speedy trial." The trial was just to determine the declarators and injunctions. One possibility is that's happened and parties are now making submissions on the next question of damages etc, but who knows. Equally there may be no decision at all yet, and the judge has just continued the case on for more time to issue one.

I think the Rangers Retail Limited stuff is probably coincidental. This company isn't involved in any of the current actions as far as I can see. Companies House says that RRL are late with their annual accounts. It may just be that has led to the query about whether RRL are still operating, which then led to the application.

RRL's registered office is at the FatBoy complex. It's not the only FatBoy company with late accounts - SDI Retail Services Limited (i.e. the company suing us in the High Court actions) are also shown on Companies House as currently late with their accounts. Maybe it's a general FatBoy thing to let subsidiary company accounts slip.

The Megastore being closed might mean something though - it seems very unusual that it's closed its doors without any explanation.
 

alex wright

Well-Known Member
I've been checking the English case report websites every now and again, and there's still no sign of a judgment here. I think if it was just a case of a final judgment having been given to the parties but withheld from publication for a period it would probably have been released by now.

One thing that should maybe be kept in mind is that the judgment fixing the "speedy trial" confirmed that the question of damages was being put on hold pending the outcome of the "speedy trial." The trial was just to determine the declarators and injunctions. One possibility is that's happened and parties are now making submissions on the next question of damages etc, but who knows.

I think the Rangers Retail Limited stuff is probably coincidental. This company isn't involved in any of the current actions as far as I can see. Companies House says that RRL are late with their annual accounts. It may just be that has led to the query about whether RRL are still operating, which then led to the application.

RRL's registered office is at the FatBoy complex. It's not the only FatBoy company with late accounts - SDI Retail Services Limited (i.e. the company suing us in the High Court actions) are also shown on Companies House as currently late with their accounts. Maybe it's a general FatBoy thing to let subsidiary company accounts slip.

The Megastore being closed might mean something though - it seems very unusual that it's closed its doors without any explanation.
I look forward to the day when your expertise isn't required on here Marty, but while it is your input is greatly appreciated.
 

Porto Loyal

Well-Known Member
I've been checking the English case report websites every now and again, and there's still no sign of a judgment here. I think if it was just a case of a final judgment having been given to the parties but withheld from publication for a period it would probably have been released by now.

One thing I mentioned earlier in the thread, but if I can ask your experienced view on it. Is it possible to that Ashley could have sought a confidentiality/gagging order as part of this ti keep the result from public knowledge
 

jimbear

Well-Known Member
Dave KIng turned him over by catching him out with their share purchase and sacking his place men, he accordingly hates King and will do anything to damage him.
As far as I am concerned, that is it in a complete nutshell. King pulled an absolute flanker on him and he will never forgive him for it.
 
Top