This is one of the decisions we were waiting on but it’s not the only one.
This is the decision in case 726. A decision was previous given in the same case by Sir Ross Cranston. In that previous decision the Court decided that Rangers had already entered into a new contract with SDI. That new contract ran from 25th July last year.
The parties were then told to go away an finalise the terms of the contract. They were unable to do so, so it went before Lionel Persey for this judgment. SDI prepared draft terms for this new 2018 contract. RFC opposed some of them.
The most critical point is that the Court has agreed that, other than in so far as required to reflect the material terms SDI are matching, the new contract has the same terms as the one we entered in 2017. That is to say that the matching rights continue in perpetuity if SDI continue to successfully match 3rd party offers.
At 10(3) Persey expressly rejects our opposition to this, basically saying that is what you agreed to in the contract.
This is what I feared would be the Court’s interpretation of the matching clause 5.7. Unfortunately it always seemed the most straightforward interpretation of the clause.
There is another case (631) where we are awaiting a decision, and that deals with the injunctions (and will then deal with any damages) in relation to the breaches of the contract we entered in 2017.
In the light of this decision (726), there will no doubt be additional claims for breach of contract for this new contract the court determined existed from July last year. We will also face a requirement to allow SDI matching rights under this new court imposed contract.
[Edit - the judgment also discloses that we have sought leave to appeal, although doesn't specify exactly what element or elements are being appealed.)