colinstein 294 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 http://m.stv.tv/news/west-central/314564-dave-king-seeks-court-permission-to-be-appointed-as-director-of-rangers/ Rangers' biggest shareholder Dave King has applied to the Court of Session for permission to become a director of the club and its parent company. The South African-based businessman, who gained control of the club's board at a vote of shareholders two weeks ago, requires approval under a section of the Insolvency Act relating to his involvement in the Rangers oldco. King was a director of the company when it went into administration, and subsequently liquidation, in 2012. The court must give permission for the 59-year-old to take up a formal post as the Insolvency Act forbids directors from taking up a post with a phoenix company which has the same or a similar name to its predecessor. No date has been set for the court to rule on the matter. In a public notice published on Friday, it is stated: "Notice is hereby given that a petition has been presented to the Court of Session by David Cunningham King, for leave, under section 216(3) of the Insolvency Act (a) to be a director of Rangers International Football Club plc and (b) to be concerned or take part in the management of The Rangers Football Club Limited." King, together with his associates Paul Murray and John Gilligan were all voted onto the board of Rangers International Football Club plc by an "overwhelming" majority vote of 85% to 15%. Murray is the club's interim chairman until King is given leave by the court. He also requires to be passed by Scottish FA chiefs and stock market regulators as a fit and proper person. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 (edited) He also requires to be passed by Scottish FA chiefs and stock market regulators as a fit and proper person. While these chiefs may actually surprise us, they pose a greater "threat" to his upcoming directorship than the CoS or stock market regulators. I would assume that he's a person in mind shoul he fail to get approval, a person who takes his seat in the director's box. Edited March 20, 2015 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted March 20, 2015 Author Share Posted March 20, 2015 I honestly can't see him being knocked back either in court or by the SFA 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,413 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I honestly can't see him being knocked back either in court or by the SFA Aye,I would agree with that,however you just never know what the cabal that are the SFA are likely to do! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 5,161 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Think of all the tims busy writing in their objections. Assuming the learned Judge ignores them and grants the Petition, it would be hard for the SFA to refuse King's application to them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Aye,I would agree with that,however you just never know what the cabal that are the SFA are likely to do! The SFA will not & cannot do anything if he is cleared by the Court of Session. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I'd imagine this will be a formality. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 The SFA will not & cannot do anything if he is cleared by the Court of Session. Isn't the Court of Session only ruling on his previous involvement with a liquidated company? They will not pass him as fit and proper, or otherwise, in relation to his affairs in SA will they? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
limeburner 0 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 An 85% to15% in favour of his motion from shareholders must be a big factor in this no? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudbertz 0 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Think of all the tims busy writing in their objections. Its really a depressing world when you think of people who actually do things like that. They need a hobby, other than the hatred of a football club. I dont think King can be held in any way responsible for what happened in 2012, so his case should be straightforward. 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.