Judge says that without disclose of financial figures the SD claim is "pure speculation"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Printable View
Judge says that without disclose of financial figures the SD claim is "pure speculation"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for SD says there is an "inherent difficulty" in quantifying losses caused by King's alleged breach of confidentiality.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for RFC says SD actions are "unfair" to his clients.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge making ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge notes SD only gave RFC witness statements at 5pm last night.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says SD explanation for delay in statements is "unconvincing" as case began in June 2015.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge notes that the list if damages given by SD was "unverified"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says however that despite delay it would be "disproportionate" to rule out SD evidence.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says SD actions an "abuse of process of the court,"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says he has come to the conclusion that SD want to "parade in the course of the trial, possibly for outside consumption"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge rules that sections of Ashley's witness statement relating to damages be "struck out"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Now moving onto costs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for RFC says "while we would dearly like the money" costs are impossible to quantify yet.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge asks counsel for RFC is he is asking for Ashley to be sent to prison?
"You can have your fun with Mr Ashley at the trial" he says.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for SD now responding on issue of "unverified" statement of losses.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Counsel for SD says there was no verification of loss statement as it had been decided not to pursue the matter further,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge ruling on costs of abandoned SD damages claim.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says "there must have been a deliberate decision" to serve the damages figures without a statement of truth attached.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says SD conduct has been "abusive" says figures were "plucked out of the air"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says SD have "wasted the courts time"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge asks counsel for RFC to prepare a schedule of costs for his consideration.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This judge really seems to dislike Mike Ashley and it seems to be clouding his judgement significantly.
Judge says his clerk has been receiving emails about blogs accusing him of "being a mason"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says blogs have said his wife is a Rangers supporter "this is untrue"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Judge says the person emailing him has been asking for action to b e taken against bloggers "this is not something intend to do"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He sounds like the legal equivalent of a Scottish football referee who can't wait to get stuck into Sevco's opponents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cilla Black
Wouldn't be surprised if he leapt up waving a red card.
Court adjourns, Full trial with be 5 Feb.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All the above posts were cut and pasted from James Dolemans tweets.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Court adjourns, full trial with be 8 Feb, expected to last 5 days,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure what just happened. It appeared like SD backed down but we are now heading for a 5 day trial?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It seems to me that sevco are untouchable,wheres my apron.
Did we get a note of which Lodge the Sheriff belongs to or what his season ticket seat number at Ibrox was?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
It always amazes me that people in Scotland are surprised to find the Institutions are inherently biased towards the establishment. Rangers are a club of the establishment. Mike Ashley is getting a hard lesson in learning just how corrupt Scotlands institutions really are. The Judge had no reason to begin stating of anything other than the facts of the case but chose to begin slating SD because it was already decided before he entered the Court what the outcome would be. I am anything but surprised, I would have been shocked if SD had been treated fairly. That is how the wee free of Scotland are, unfortunately for the rest of us who would prefer to live in an inclusive fair society one free of bigots. And for the record I am not a Catholic which should not matter anyhow but shockingly it does in this banana republic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo_1875
I thought this was being heard in England? Maybe a different case I'm thinking of..Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
If it is being heard in England then sorry about that, however, what I said is still more or less the truth of the institutions, it is rife with the wee free/masons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalianwanda
Think you're right. Royal court of justice wasn't it ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalianwanda
England/Scotland, it does'nt matter really does it, the handshakers are everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone
The thing is, this isn't exactly a black and white goodies vs baddies situation where only corruption can lead to the baddies winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Ashley is an odious turd himself and imo there is every chance that he is at it. It can't be great being a judge caught up in the middle of this bun fight.
Surely the Judge should just stick to the facts of the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I was of the same understanding. But, irrespective of where the case is being conducted, I would have expected a government appointed judge to overlook personal opinions and prejudices and consider the facts of the case. The devil in me wants everything to go against Sevco but if it appears that it is the opposite then my ( perhaps naive) natural faith in justice would have to accept it. It turns my stomach to think that a judge would be corrupt in his findings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalianwanda
Best you turn your eyes away from cases involving TRIFC as your blind faith in impartial justice will be sorely lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
Sounds like you have a bit of an issue with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Just want a fair and inclusive Scotland which does not have secretive groups of peepul who put themselves above all others.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBHibees
Nothing wrong with that is there?:flag:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo_1875
or a red hand
From what I've read this judge is a bit of a bampot and not scared to totally fly in the face of whats deemed as right or accepted..Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
And yes theres secret societies all over the place..But I still don't see what this particular case has to do with an inclusive Scotland (anything dealt with in Scotland, yes :wink:)
What's wrong with what's deemed to be right? The wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalianwanda
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The origins of the case stem from an injunction Ashley got on the Sevco board before last June's GM, preventing the terms of the contract being discussed. King was accused of breaching the injunction and what has been discussed is damages for the breach and the trial will be for contempt of the court injunction.
The way this Judge behaves he will probably overrule the injunction and criticise the court that granted it and finish off with a couple of verses of the Sash. :greengrin
Its subjective....Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
https://rangersfraudcase.wordpress.c...damages-claim/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
'Those who wish to complicate matters seek to evade the truth'Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalianwanda
What's subjective about the truth? Why would a Judge however big a 'bampot' he or she is regarded, not look to what's accepted as being 'right'? Sorry but I cannot accept a person should be a judge who turns away from what is accepted as being 'right' and I would substitute the word 'truth' for what's right for a Judge. If a Judge interprets the facts of a case properly he or she should arrive at what is clearly 'right/truth', yes?
In terms of the judges behaviour it's subjective...In terms of the facts of the matter being right or wrong, is that not what the judge is doing? It seemed pretty cut and dry in terms of the information put to him that SD didn't have a case..Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Not 'blind faith', Doddsy, natural faith. There is a wee bit of a difference. If you accept that corruption is intrinsic in our justice system, the game's a bogey.Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Maybe he did.Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
You seem like a nice enough bloke so I don't want to disillusion you. There are a multiple of different levels of corruption. How do you think the vast majority of middle class Bankers got away with it yet a common bank robber gets 20 to 30 years in Jail? Just one example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
No need for his commentary though. Can't see how SD's current share price is relevant and if it is relevant then it probably supports SD's case for losses.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I'm no legal eagle but no matter that the judge seems a little bit strange, SD did not seem to present a very good case at all and there is no way you could find against sevco based on the evidence they provided.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Given that we are coming to our view on the basis of Doleman's Tweets (welcome as they are), I'd say it's impossible to do anything other than speculate as to why he would say that. For example, he may be suspicious as to SD's motives bringing the case; perhaps he thinks that SD's recent troubles are driving the case more than they should. But..like i say.. that's only speculation on my part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo_1875
All will be clearer, one would hope, when the case actually goes to trial.
The responses from the judge were at points weird but some hilarious however, reading through it, it seems the judge knew this was a joke in both case and SD representation. I personally think the judge was purely displeased at the time wasted. I mean and quote: Judge "where the original estimate of £200k damages came from?" SD Counsel "says he is not sure." Come on! He is representing the claimant and should have all info at hand and provide it on asking!! Its really simple, prove your morally right!
Was there any reference to Sevco's false claim that the loan had been repaid last time they were in court ?
Solatium in negligence cases is a non-accountable amount of money usually based on unquantifiable mental distress. Just because it is difficult to put a price on does not mean it is not worthy.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmith
That is irrelevant in a court of law. Prove you are legally right is what they are interested in, you would hope they would be one in the same but we know that they aren't always.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmith
Yes I agree therefore:
Prove you are legally and morally right - if being legally and morally reasonable and truthful.
That's what I'm waiting for - surely to C****t even the Hun are NOT getting away with that ??Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
The case would not be being heard at all if there was no truth whatsoever in the matter. It is up to TRIFC to defend themselves against the Pursuer's (SD) account of what happened. It is obvious the GASL did comment on what he had been ordered not to by a previous court. This is an open and shut case made complex because it is TRIFC, the establishment's clumpany. The matter of how much is really quite irrelevant to the bigger matter of perjury which is why we have a circus going on with a somewhat clown of a Judge in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmith
I agree with you but lets not get all bent out of shape by it. Facts are needed and SD Counsel did not provide these. The 5 day session will be a different spot altogether.
I hope so because it seems to me that MA is getting shortchanged from his legal team or there is more than meets the eye in all of this. It could be MA has been put off fighting the GASL hence the poor quality of his legal team's performance. I would be thinking of suing the Legal team at this point for very poor representation.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmith
Going by their performance so far I don't think Ashley even pays his lawyers a minimum wage.
I'm sure it'll be different at the 5 day session. I get the feeling MA/SD are toying with this and will come in hard and heavy. Just a feeling ...
There's also the possibility that SD don't have much of a case, and his legal team are trying their best to gild it.Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Ashley is just having a bit of fun with Rangers to pass the time.He can afford to do it and other than annoying King doesn't give a monkey's.Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Attachment 15927Attachment 15928
I thought that I had seen Justice Peter Smith somewhere before
If that's their best then I'd really hate to see them at their worst. Mr Bean could do better.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
There's something about a 'tache and a smirk that makes me deeply uncomfortable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunswickbill
Have you had a bad experience with Mr Petrie?Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
#Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunswickbill
If I was the accused and walked into Court and saw him, I'd think I'm stuffed before the off. Looks more like the 'Hangman'.
We all have. [emoji22]Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo_1875
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe, just maybe, they don't have a very good case. :cbQuote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
As the Scotland great King Kenny would say 'mibbes aye mibbes naw'.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
:saltireflag
Strange?? Shirley has his finger right on the pulse:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
"One of the blogs insists that I am a Freemason, which is wrong," said the judge.
"Also, that my wife is a 'life-long Rangers supporter'."
He added: "She is from Edinburgh. The idea that she would support any Glasgow team is laughable."
Something's laughable all right.
**** Direct have a very, very poor case. I'm sure more learned posters here will concur.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
All we're seeing is Ashley thrashing about in a series of vindictive litigation.
It's not doing him any favours - and that's an understatement. It's getting to the point where NUFC's Sky money is keeping the SD ship afloat.
Got some figures for us non financial whizz kids to back that up?
Has NU not just spent north of £20 mill on new players with more reportedly in the pipeline?
I understand why you don't like Ashley, but that is just fanciful.Quote:
Originally Posted by magpie1892
Even if the share price continues to tumble and he loses all the money he's made in the past 5 or so years, SD is still worth a whole lot more than NUFC. It was him who stemmed the losses at the club.
I disagree, I think he has a good case. The GASL negatively commented and that is no good for any buisness. I thinkd MA is getting bored now and his heart is not in it any more hence the poor representation of what is a good case.Quote:
Originally Posted by magpie1892
Evening times saying The Rangers have banned Chris McLaughlin, and the BBC re having another one of their 'boycotts':
BBC Scotland said: "We are disappointed that Rangers took the decision to ban our reporter Chris McLaughlin from Ibrox. We believe it is unjustifiable and we stand by the integrity and the quality of our journalism. "We will continue to report on Rangers both on and off the pitch and will feature match action where appropriate but, until this issue is resolved, we will not be sending journalists to Ibrox or attending Rangers’ press conferences.”
Not sure if this suits your argument or not but the top judge in Scotland who retired last year, Lord Gill is very much a Catholic, and a practicing one too. Just saying. ...Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
The siege mentality plays well with the hordes.Quote:
Originally Posted by s.a.m
I did'nt know that but my experience of working in one of Scotland's institutions does not change my point of view whatsoever. :coolhib:Quote:
Originally Posted by Corstorphine Hibby
That in a nutshell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Mike Ashley clearly has enough money to dick around in court, but I can't see how you can win a case for financial loss when you are unable or unwilling to demonstrate what that loss is.
It's vexatious and an abuse of process. Doesn't mean he won't win the war, though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He would have been a good judge in cases of fraud where companies have gone underwater.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corstorphine Hibby
I like this bitQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Earlier counsel for Rangers, Mr McCormack QC had told the court that a witness statement from Ashley had only been received at 4.55pm on the day before the hearing, a delay blamed on the “festive rush,” in Sports Direct during the Christmas holidays.
It says to me Ashleys legal team were on the tills and stacking shelves and given their performance in Court perhaps they should have been!
With regards to the £200k damages.
I understand this is related to sales. The share price has naff all to do with this. The loss of sevco related sales in the sevco shops and elsewhere in Ned Direct would have been quite easy to qualify however is it not the case that sevco is required by the onerous contract to make good these non sales so in fact SD won't be affected.
Probably why it's been withdrawn sevcos legal team wouldn't need to be genius material to pick holes in that
Despite the case being heard in England?Quote:
Originally Posted by doddsy
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
They have a new fans group.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...ae81f0264c.jpg
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...ad7a0e3a72.jpg
Lovely people. [emoji3]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your point being?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The irony of businesses going bust and losing money seems to be lost on these bears.😂😂😂😂Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://bearsfightback.wordpress.com...rs-fight-back/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh dear. ....Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
It's difficult to understand the psychology of these peepul. They are almost beyond help. The men in the white coats should be wading in with straightjackets for these total nutters. they have lost touch with all reality and are ill with bigotry. Deary me.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlex
:agree: Doesn't look like they have a typesetter or publicity department either. Or are they actually ERS football club?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlex
Nice start, bound to be taken seriously by all.
Or is ERS football maybe a new breakaway sport they are launching?
Absolutely hilarious - These trumpets never fail to amuse, they've been force fed bull**** by Level 5 PR for so long that they are incapable of rational and independent analysis. Puffed up pompous fools.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Well that was a fairly brief and half-hearted fightback.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
"This site has been deleted by the authors"
I know one shouldn't laugh.....