chilledbear 16 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Taken from FF RANGERS have launched a multi-million pound legal action against the club’s former directors and billionaire tycoon Mike Ashley. The Gers allege that Charles Green, Imran Ahmad, Brian Stockbridge and Derek Llambias did not act in the business' best interests in a commercial deal with Sports Direct. The deals include an agreement for the naming rights to Ibrox which was sold off for just £1, despite the Light Blues' believing it is worth £500,000 a year. The Light Blues also believe that Mr Ashley unfairly benefited and assisted from the alleged negligence displayed by Mr Green and his colleagues, who are being sued in the Court of Session in Edinburgh. The Premiership side hope to recover a total of £4,106,470.83 from the action. They also want a civil judge to declare the Partnership Marketing Agreement void. The action came to light following a short hearing on Friday. Advocate Craig Sandison QC, who was appearing on behalf of Sports Direct and Mr Ashley, succeeded in his attempt to get Rangers to disclose documents to them. The lawyer argued that Sports Direct and Mr Ashley needed access to the documents to help them prepare for the case. Judge Lord Boyd agreed with Mr Sandison’s submissions and allowed both Sports Direct’s and Mr Ashley’s lawyers to access the documents. He added: “I am content to allow the motion.” The club’s legal team believe Mr Green, Mr Ahmad and Mr Stockbridge breached their “fiduciary” duties when they negotiated the “naming rights” for Ibrox stadium. The agreement was in existence for approximately two years but was never enacted. The directors who negotiated the deal claim that they didn’t do anything wrong. They say that if another company made a rival offer, Mr Ashley’s firm would have to make another offer at a competitive price to retain the rights. The club also object to the Partnership Marketing Agreement which was agreed in 2014. This allowed Sports Direct to secure advertising space at Ibrox. Lawyers acting for Rangers claim the advertising space was also sold for £1. They claim that Mr Llambias agreed that the agreement with Sports Direct should go ahead. Rangers claim that Mr Ashley “assisted” in the breach of the “fiduciary duties” owed by the directors to the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted August 12, 2016 Author Share Posted August 12, 2016 http://thesun.uk/6016BFIVs 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Slightly disappointed at the value of recovery we are looking for. Unless more can be awarded?? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Slightly disappointed at the value of recovery we are looking for. Unless more can be awarded?? Think they can only claim back to when it was signed 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueblue 64 53 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Slightly disappointed at the value of recovery we are looking for. Unless more can be awarded?? This is a claim for naming rights and advertising within Ibrox and does not include the retail deal i believe. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,237 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 They also want a civil judge to declare the Partnership Marketing Agreement void. That would be excellent if possible. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Can the club sudpoena Ashley into court on this? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,120 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Would be great to win but a disaster to lose and end up paying all the legal bills for all of them 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Be interesting to see what documentation is placed before the Court and ergo into the public domain gagging order or not. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 (edited) Be interesting to see what documentation is placed before the Court and ergo into the public domain gagging order or not. I think the S**vs left a trail of incriminating evidence, by e-mails and memos. Don't forget the memo/ e-mail that was released from baw face Sommers to Ashley, begging him to increase his stake holding to thwart King from gaining control. Thus stopping baw face from losing his directorship. Edited August 12, 2016 by aweebluesoandso 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.