Live from the battlefield, Ashley's Tanks take another Tanking.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Ashley loses latest battle with King and the SFA. updates to follow.

[cooponthewing 1,139]

Are zeeeee panzers defiantly heading for zeeee hills???? Vot is happening?

[aweebluesoandso 290]

]Mike Ashley loses court fight over Scottish FA fine

Grant Russell Grant Russell

an hour ago

 

The businessman claimed the governing body had made an 'error of law' over his influence at Rangers.

Mike Ashley: Lost his latest fight with the Scottish FA.

Mike Ashley: Lost his latest fight with the Scottish FA. Richard Sellers / PA Archive/PA Images

 

Mike Ashley has failed in a court fight over a fine imposed by the Scottish Football Association over his influence at Rangers.

 

The businessman had sought a judicial review over the decision of the governing body to levy the £1000 sanction, claiming an error in law had been made.

 

MASH Holdings Limited, of which Ashley is the 100% shareholder, entered a credit facility arrangement with Rangers in October 2014.

 

As part of the conditions of the loan, his associate Derek Llambias was nominated and subsequently appointed as a director of Rangers International Football Club plc and its subsidiary Rangers Football Club Limited.

 

Ashley is forbidden under the rules of the SFA from having influence over Rangers beyond his 9% shareholding because of his majority stake in English Championship club Newcastle United.

 

A judicial panel ruled he had breached those rules as a result of MASH loaning Rangers money.

 

In his opinion, Lord Brodie agreed with the view of the SFA's compliance officer that Ashley, through MASH, had through the "very granting of the right to nominate directors in and of itself gave rise to the possibility of the petitioner influencing the affairs of two clubs".

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Sorry there Bears, got caught in the crossfire haha

[aweebluesoandso 290]

url]http://stv.tv/news/west-central/1357022-mike-ashley-loses-court-fight-over-scottish-fa-fine/[/url]

 

Mike Ashley loses court fight over Scottish FA fine

 

Mike Ashley has failed in a court fight over a fine imposed by the Scottish Football Association over his influence at Rangers.

 

The businessman had sought a judicial review over the decision of the governing body to levy the £1000 sanction, claiming an error in law had been made.

 

MASH Holdings Limited, of which Ashley is the 100% shareholder, entered a credit facility arrangement with Rangers in October 2014.

 

As part of the conditions of the loan, his associate Derek Llambias was nominated and subsequently appointed as a director of Rangers International Football Club plc and its subsidiary Rangers Football Club Limited.

 

Ashley is forbidden under the rules of the SFA from having influence over Rangers beyond his 9% shareholding because of his majority stake in English Championship club Newcastle United.

 

A judicial panel ruled he had breached those rules as a result of MASH loaning Rangers money.

 

In his opinion, Lord Brodie agreed with the view of the SFA's compliance officer that Ashley, through MASH, had through the "very granting of the right to nominate directors in and of itself gave rise to the possibility of the petitioner influencing the affairs of two clubs".

[aweebluesoandso 290]

The club has a legal ruling nailing Ashley to the retail merchandise deal at Rangers and Newcastle, dual influence?

[Bluedell 5,356]

The club has a legal ruling nailing Ashley to the retail merchandise deal at Rangers and Newcastle, dual influence?

 

Not sure that a retail deal equals influence.

[buster. 4,809]

Not sure that a retail deal equals influence.

 

Retail deal = Commercial = Influence

ie. major part of one of the three main revenue streams for the club

 

- Matchday

- COMMERCIAL

- Broadcast

 

The following Regulations prohibit one Club controlling another and individuals, either alone or with others, having interests in or influence over more than one Club. Associations and dual interests or influence giving rise to actual or perceived conflicts of interest which undermine the integrity of League competitions and the reputation, credibility and image of professional football Clubs and all those who support or have a financial or commercial interest in League football are entitled to the assurance that no such Club or individual(s) can or will influence the outcome of any match or enter into any arrangements which prejudice the interests of other Clubs. In exceptional circumstances the Board may allow an individual to have a dual interest but this will be subject to conditions to safeguard the interests of The League and its Clubs.

98.2.4 to have any power whatsoever to influence the financial, commercial or business affairs or the management or administration of that Club; or ....

 

 

http://www.efl.com/global/section10.aspx

Edited June 10, 2016 by buster.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Not sure that a retail deal equals influence.

 

Ashley was claiming MASH and himself were separate entities. Also his interest in Newcastle United where not linked, Lord Brodie agreed with the SFA in that Ashley in loaning Rangers money and nominating directors (Lliambias) in RIFC plc, he MASH/Ashley broke the SFA rules, in that he did therefore have influences in two clubs.

 

He can't claim that now, if we are claiming in any subsequent court case Ashley had influence through MASH to the merchandise contract surely?

Edited June 10, 2016 by aweebluesoandso

[pete 2,499]

BILLIONAIRE Mike Ashley is facing a £250,000 legal bill – after losing his court fight over a £1000 football fine.

 

The Newcastle United owner yesterday lost a battle to reverse the SFA’s *decision to fine him for breaching dual ownership rules after he took a stake in Rangers.

 

The SFA are certain to demand that the Sports Direct owner covers their legal fees for the court fight.

 

Judges will rule later on whether to hit him with the legal bill, which is understood to be £250,000.

 

A court source said: “It is likely that Ashley will be forced to pay the entire bill for the case – including the SFA’s bill, as well as his own.

 

“The SFA’s costs will be well over £100,000 and his own bill will be much the same. He’ll be looking at a quarter of a million, at least.

 

“That judgment will come at a later date but lawyers don’t come cheap.

 

“He might wish he’d just paid the original fine but then £100,000 is chicken feed to Ashley.”

 

It has been a bad week for Ashley, who came under fire at a Westminster committee on Tuesday for “Victorian” working practices at Sports Direct.

 

Last night, SFA bosses welcomed the court victory.

 

A spokesman said: “We are pleased at the decision and we were always confident of a positive outcome.”

 

 

It is being seen as a major victory for SFA compliance officer Tony McGlennan, who brought the charge against Ashley.

 

The dispute broke out after he took an 8.92 per cent shareholding stake in Rangers in October 2014 via MASH Holdings, who are wholly owned by Ashley.

 

The club entered a credit facility with MASH and Ashley’s right-hand men Derek Llambias and Barry Leach were appointed *directors of the club as a result.

 

The SFA concluded Ashley broke their rules about how an individual should not be involved with two football clubs at the same time and handed the world’s 318th richest man a £7500 fine.

 

That sum was reduced to just £1000 after Ashley’s lawyers appealed but he refused to pay and tried to have the fine booted out in a judicial review at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

 

The tycoon claimed the SFA hadn’t applied the principles of “natural justice” when dealing with him.

 

Advocate Craig Sandison QC claimed it was MASH *Holdings who controlled the Rangers shares and claimed there was a legal difference between them and Ashley.

 

But in yesterday’s written judgment, Lord Brodie dismissed his case, saying: “I shall uphold the second plea in law for the respondent.”

 

It’s the latest in a series of aggressive moves from Ashley as part of his feud with new Rangers chairman Dave King, who toppled the previous board.

 

Read more at http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/mike-ashley-faces-massive-250k-8163578#kwoOBkL0ezlwuF2q.99