caseyjones 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Matter to be referred back to the appeal tribunal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,066 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 n light of Tuesdayâ??s decision by Lord Glennie at the Court of Session, it is necessary to clarify the position of the Scottish FA in relation to the disciplinary sanctions imposed on Rangers FC. "Football must always operate within the law of the land. None the less, it is regrettable that a member club has sought recourse for a football disciplinary matter through increasingly costly civil court action. "The right of appeal is now open to the Scottish FA through the Court of Session. However, by so doing, the very principles on which the Scottish FA - and, for that matter, UEFA and FIFA â?? are founded, namely football disciplinary matters being dealt with within its own jurisdiction, would be fundamentally compromised. "Therefore, it is our intention to accede to Lord Glennieâ??s request and refer the matter back to the Appellate Tribunal, which will consider the remaining sanctions open to it. Details of a new hearing date will be confirmed in early course. "The Scottish FA is bound â?? as are all other decision-making bodies in this country â?? by the Supervisory Jurisdiction of the court under Scots Law. The Scottish FAâ??s Senior Counsel represented to the Court of Session that it had no jurisdiction with reference to Article 5.1(b) and © of the Scottish FAâ??s Articles and Articles 4(2), 62(1), 63(1), 63(2) and 64(2) of the FIFA Statutes. This representation was rejected by Lord Glennie, who considered that the provisions of the FIFA statutes and the provisions of the Scottish FA Articles did not oust the supervisory jurisdiction of the courts to deal with questions of the powers open to the tribunal. "It is important to reiterate that the additional sanction of a registration embargo was imposed by an independent Judicial Panel chaired by a leading QC, Gary Allan, and upheld by an Appellate Tribunal chaired by a Supreme Court Judge, Lord Carloway. "That in itself vindicates the robustness of the Judicial Panel Protocol, which has been questioned in hackneyed comment in certain quarters this week. It should be noted that two vastly experienced Supreme Court Judges, Lord Carloway and Lord Glennie, arrived at diametrically opposed viewpoints on the same issue. "With our Annual General Meeting taking place on Wednesday, June 6, it will be appropriate to remind member clubs that by very dint of their membership of the Scottish FA, they accept and abide by the Articles of Association." 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share Posted May 31, 2012 "@STVRaman: Regan: The appellate tribunal will ''consider the remaining sanctions open to it''" 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 "Remaining" sanctions? The registration ban was never an available sanction, so why be childish and mention "remaining?" 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share Posted May 31, 2012 "Remaining" sanctions?The registration ban was never an available sanction, so why be childish and mention "remaining?" Technically, a fine is not available to the tribunal as we have already been fined the maximum amount. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 An appeal panel can't give us a higher punishment can they? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share Posted May 31, 2012 An appeal panel can't give us a higher punishment can they? They can give the punishments which are listed. That's what the judicial review was about. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggordy 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Did Regan shit himself when it was suggested he may be in contempt of Court if he didn't acknowledge Lord Glennie's verdict ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share Posted May 31, 2012 Did Regan shit himself when it was suggested he may be in contempt of Court if he didn't acknowledge Lord Glennie's verdict ? They, along with Rangers, had 21 days to appeal the ruling. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 bitchslapped into submission. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.