Jump to content

 

 

Whyte/Ticketus case adjourned until January - no jail for Whyte


Recommended Posts

Apparently the adjournment is to allow the completion of inquiries, as to the knowledge of Ticketus and at least two others with regard to the contracts and agreements with Whyte in this action.

Some think the Crown Office in Scotland were precipitous in the issuing of warrants, whilst not being in possession of all the evidence, which the English court has adjourned to be presented with.

The smart money is on Ticketus's action being thrown out, not without further ramifications for some involved parties it must be said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the adjournment is to allow the completion of inquiries, as to the knowledge of Ticketus and at least two others with regard to the contracts and agreements with Whyte in this action.

Some think the Crown Office in Scotland were precipitous in the issuing of warrants, whilst not being in possession of all the evidence, which the English court has adjourned to be presented with.

The smart money is on Ticketus's action being thrown out, not without further ramifications for some involved parties it must be said.[/Q

 

Isn't this case based on the claim that Whyte did't disclose that he had been disqualified from acting as a company director for a period, and had therefore misled them when he applied for the funding? Basically he had committed a fraud on them. It's about how he got the funds not what he did with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the adjournment is to allow the completion of inquiries, as to the knowledge of Ticketus and at least two others with regard to the contracts and agreements with Whyte in this action.

Some think the Crown Office in Scotland were precipitous in the issuing of warrants, whilst not being in possession of all the evidence, which the English court has adjourned to be presented with.

The smart money is on Ticketus's action being thrown out, not without further ramifications for some involved parties it must be said.

 

The case in England is a civil case, the case in Scotland is a criminal case. You simply don't hold up criminal proceedings for the conclusion of a civil case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem for the Scottish criminal action is that a Law Lord has already ruled that Ticketus under Scots Law bought no tickets, how the PF's office get around that one is something of wonderment, whereas the civil action will be as usual on probability which will also be a problem for Ticketus I.E what led them to believe that the tickets were Whyte's to sell, taking into consideration that they had previously done business with SDM's regime.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.