Printable View
How?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I suppose if he'd not loaned them cash they'd be even worse off, but he's got them spending big bucks on lawyers and not players. You agree that's a good thing right? Or would you rather The Rangers get to play at being one half of the Old Firm again, as its for the good of the game:confused:
The majority of us want the end-result of all this 'court-action/money problems' concerning the Hun, is to see (hopefully) the total and utter implosion of them, along with their partners-in-grime at the GFA. Ashley's reasons/aims/hopes for doing what he's doing may be different from ours but as 'Ozyhibby' says -
'one club is playing by different rules and the governing body is helping them'
So anything and anyone that damages either of these two disgusting 'entities' is fine by me !
When two loathsome forces collide, all the civilised chap can do is sit back and enjoy the spectacle, hoping for damage maximisation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deansy
As far as Sports Direct is concerned I've known a few folk that have worked / are working there. None had any particular grips other than the odd **** manager. Once they become managers the bonuses are pretty spectacular. Having said that many managers leave just after bonus time!
I have also known people who have worked for the government, at all levels, Standard Life and other insurance companies, the RBS and other banks who have all had a lot worse to say about their employer.
For Scottish football though I think he may be a double edged sword, maybe even more edges than that!
I hope, if what has been suggested regarding King is true, then he doesn't go after Scottish football with the same fervour and there's something left at the end of it to take the game forward in a sustainable way.
Mike Ashley and Dave King desrve each other and we should be glad they have nothing to do with our club.
The only concern we should have as bystanders to this farce is that we don't watch their odious club being giving unfair advantage and rules bent by our gutless, arse covering authorities at the expense of ourselves and others.
The one good thing about Ashley getting involved with these vile creatures is everything is coming out in the wash, and the authorities will find it very difficult to brush things under the carpet without everyone being able to scrutinise it. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
:hmmm: HereQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack
"Temporary workers at Sports Direct, the booming retail chain controlled by the billionaire Mike Ashley, are receiving effective hourly rates of pay below the minimum wage, an investigation by the Guardian can reveal.
Warehouse staff at the group, which is controlled by Britain’s 22nd richest man, are required to go through searches at the end of each shift, for which their time is unpaid, while they also suffer harsh deductions from their wage packets for clocking in for a shift just one minute late.
The practices contribute to many staff being paid an effective rate of about £6.50 an hour against the statutory rate of £6.70 – potentially saving the FTSE 100 firm millions of pounds a year at the expense of some of the poorest workers in the UK". Nice.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman?lang=en
Action starting at the Courts, King told to dispose of his coffee ! :greengrin
James Doleman @jamesdoleman 1m1 minute ago Judge to SD counsel "Do you think the court should grant an injunction to stop people commenting on information in the public domain"
Judge 'is your client interested in having a relationship with Mr King or do you just want to grind him into the dust?"
Judge brings up issue of SD "bobble hats" with f*** King on them. "How does that help"
think its fair to say King is walking away from court today.
James Doleman @jamesdoleman 8s9 seconds ago SD counsel asks for part of hearing to be heard in private to preserve confidentiality http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/taunt%20smiley.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
I think it would be good if the judge trashes Sports Direct's case and awards costs against them.
Might make Big Mike turn really nasty ! :greengrin
Some of the tweets give the impression that the judge is anti SD/MA and pro DK.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Could be the case if the court decides that however the info got into the public domain it's there now. Who'd have thought someone associated with the rangers could do something contrary to the law and for there to be little or no consequences :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibby70
Dolemans crowdfunding plea was principally being shared on Celtic minded social media.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
Although it's fair to say his tweets on actual proceedings are pretty straight down the line.
It's a win win for us popcorn munchers ........... Ashley taken to the cleaners or King further blackened .......... take your pick. :greengrin
Judge muses that disclosure of documents at general meetings of Rangers shareholders may not be a breach of the undertaking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
William McCormack for the defence says documents under discussion are already "all over the press"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
William McCormack for the defence says documents under discussion are already "all over the press"Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
Judge rises to allow press to consider whether to sign document to be bound by confidentiality on certain case documents.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Assembled media and public have signed a confidentiality undertaking on reference to certain documents in court.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh, I'm not saying its the best place to work, I've read these reports and watched the TV documentary. I think in comparison to so called exemplar employers, like the government used to claim it was :brickwall, its far from being the worst. It doesn't make it OK though.Quote:
Originally Posted by FranckSuzy
Court takes a short break while issue of confidential documents dealt with
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dave King offers to sign the document. He's informed he's not a member of the public so does not have to do so.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge passes confidentiality order. Tells press we will go to jail if we break it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: Commercial relationship between SD & Rangers for some years. Joint venture company which sells Rangers-branded goods under licence.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: Our group has been providing loan facilities. Second tranche of £5m not drawn down.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rangers say Mike Ashley was repaid his £5m loan yesterday. Securities will not be released until final working day of this year.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sports Direct's QC says he was unaware the £5m had been repaid.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge questioning nature of initial SD deal. Points out it was entered at important stage in survival of the club.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Are you there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Most tweets are from Grant Russell today. James Doleman a bit quieter.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, just cutting and pasting Grant Russell and James Doleman who are. For some reason, when I copy their tweets, their names are not on it like usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
that's what I was thinking. Ta.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Judge: Your case is that Mr Ashley can tell the press anything he likes about a meeting. Mr King can't acknowledge he went to a meeting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: It was an interview about Mr King, his status in South Africa and his 32,000 or so bottles of wine. Gary Player also mentioned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Court told confidentiality agreement was signed by former RIFC director Sandy Easedale
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge now questioning SD assertion King had authority to speak on behalf of company. Says directors would have to give said permission.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge notes a director is not always speaking for the company when speaking to the media.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: You've got to establish he was authorised to make the statement by Rangers directors. If not, your case is dead in the water.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: If you don't prove the company expressly authorised King to make this statement, you are completely dead in the water.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: You've got no evidence that board or Rangers authorised this statement?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: Our opposition is that Mr King had knowledge of significance of the order.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for Sports Direct tells court he disbelieves King's affadavit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
King has given the court an affadavit saying he was unaware of details of confidentiality agreement when he spoke to Sky Sports
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
King gave written statement to court saying he did not know detail of confidentiality agreement at time of TV interview.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD discussing Sky interview. Judge says argument must be that detail of confidential discussion were put in public domain.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for Sports Direct notes that ignorance of the order itself is no defence
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
QC Counsel for Sports Direct notes that ignorance of the order itself is no defence
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge notes press have "a tendency to invent things" asks for proof King said was attributed to him
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The judge says he is aware the press have a tendency to invent things. Asks for proof King said something which breached agreement.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: Mr King may be liable if he knew the order and acted on the impression he was speaking on behalf of Rangers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says King may be guilty of contempt but that does not mean Rangers are as no proof board authorised his statement
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Court now being told details of how last court injunction was served on Rangers. Counsel says was sent to their office
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Court shown email sent to King from James Blair about the confidentiality order. SD counsel says proves King untruthful in affadavit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In Kings affadavit he says he did not fully read the order and did not believe in banned him discussing "the fact of meetings"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD arguing over an email from King acknowledging existence of order. Judge querying whether that extended to discussion of meetings.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: Mr King said that on oath. Do I disbelieve him? You [SD] haven't proved to a criminal standard this extended to discussion of meeting
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: Can hardly be clearer he sent an email acknowledging. Judge says King said on oath he didn't read injunction in detail.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge notes that email alone is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt although his affadavit may be "difficult to accept"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
King statement read out: I did not review the injunction in detail at that time as James Blair had provided restriction in body of email.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In Kings affadavit he states he did not open attachment in email from James Blair
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: The consequences of going to prison are quite severe for [King]. He could say goodbye going to US for forseeable future (for example)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge notes that King is a "successful businessman" and sending him to prison would have 'serious consequences'
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge asks SD to prove King wilfully disregarded the order. Says SD should have asked for King to be cross-examined in court.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: One could hardly look for clearer evidence in him having admitted he received an important email headlined "URGENT: Draft order".
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge questions why SD have not applied for King to give oral evidence as then he could have 'judged his statements for myself"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: There cannot be reasonable doubt he had knowledge of the order.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for Sports Direct calls King's position "completely implausible"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This judge sounds very incompetent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
So just because you are a successful businessman means your exempt form the law and court orders now?
SD: It is wholly implausible Mr King (didn't understand email). Judge retorts that it "amazes me" how people act in this regard these days.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: If he was saying I didn't get the email, that would be one thing. He isn't. He's not saying he wasn't aware of the order.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds like the judge is leaning towards RIFC
Counsel for SD says they only have to show King's "knowledge of the order" not his "understanding of it"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Leaning? he is firmly sat on their side of the fenceQuote:
Originally Posted by Benny Brazil
I'm not so sure. I think he is just argumentative. We will see when Sevco lawyer gets up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Brazil
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibee87
Someone I am aware who was successful businessman was sentenced o2 years in Perth precisely because he was successful. The evidence of 35,000 text messages on his phone relating to drug transactions was kind of damning
Or the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibee87
Seems to be a break just now. Kings defence that he did not bother to read the court judgement is pretty poor, even to my untrained legal mind.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for SD notes that each director of Rangers was sent a copy of court order.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is the UK in the 21st Century. Of course if you are a "successful businessman" means you are above certain aspects of the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibee87
As mentioned previously, SD currently discussing the detail of how the notice of order was served. Copy to all Rangers directors.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Court now going over details of how summons served on King
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge sounds like he might be amenable to such a defence seeing as King is a "successful businessman".Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Judge: Mr King was never evasive. You [SD] made a conscious decision not to serve him out of jurisdiction (in South Africa).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SD: Decision made not to serve King with the order personally at a meeting. Order was simply left at home address of other directors.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Must be having one trouser leg rolled up that causes some kind of weight differential.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Brazil
I think that John James' gobsh*tery guesswork has lulled people into thinking this was a slam dunk.
Counsel for SD asked why other officers of RIFC have not been summoned to court along with King?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Paraphrasing the judge: Effect is that if you establish a limited company is in the contempt... directors can be pursued.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge "is there any particular reason you picked on Mr King?"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Discussion between SD and judge continues to centre around how the order was served, who on and the responsibility of company directors.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for SD says breach carried out by King personally, hence why he is in court
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is the heart of the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Because King is the only one to discuss the off limit things in the media :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
SD: Did King act in a way which was breach of order? And in doing so was he doing so on behalf of Rangers?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: You've got to persuade me he was in breach because he discussed the contents of certain discussions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge: Start with the revelation of the discussions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for SD, there was a meeting on 12 June between King and Ashley which should not have been disclosed to media
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge asks if SD leaked details of meeting to press. SD say no. Judge asks if Mr Ashley has said so on oath.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk