An interesting document has popped up on Companies House today.
It is linked to here – RFC MISC
It is an extract order from the Court of Session dated 9th March.
Rangers Football Club PLC (in administration) has applied to have an administration order made over the company.
The application is to be heard further in court on 19th March at 10 am.
The application is being made by the company (Rangers). As the administrators are agents of the company, appointed by the company previously, they have applied on behalf of the Company for this order.
The effect of it being granted would be that they become administrators under an administration order, rather than by a notice of appointment. One effect of this would be that they could no longer be removed by the company. This is perhaps an indication that Duff & Phelps (D&P) saw potential conflict with the Company in the form of Mr Whyte.
Pending the order being granted, D&P are now appointed as interim “managers” of the company (although this does not mean they will be sitting in the dug-out at Rangers’ next match!)
I see that David Sellar QC was instructed to appear. He is one of the “big guns” of the corporate Bar in Scotland. The administrators were taking no chances when the case called before Lord Hodge.
Under Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1985 Paragraph 11 states:-
The court may make an administration order in relation to a company only if satisfied—
(a) that the company is or is likely to become unable to pay its debts, and
(b) that the administration order is reasonably likely to achieve the purpose of administration.
So as at the date of application, the position remains that the debts cannot or are likely not to be paid and the administrators still think the purposes of administration can be achieved.
These are (1) to rescue the business as a going concern; (2) if unable to do so, to obtain a better result for the creditors by administration than by liquidation; (3) to settle the secured creditors.
So, as of last week, D&P still think they can achieve one of the goals.
I think that there is a possibility (although I am not definite on this after a quick look) that the making of an administration order might re-start the clock for the administrators to make their proposals to creditors about achieving the goals of administration. In that case the 10th April deadline for doing so would move back to mid May!
A visit to the Court of Session on 19th March might be interesting to hear what the administrators have to say, through their QC, to the judge, rather than what the administrators themselves have been saying to the press!