They state the following:-
“… the SPL has so far failed to request Duff and Phelps to relinquish the company’s member share.
The member clubs of the league voted against the newco Rangers assuming the old company’s share at a ballot on July 4.
Under the SPL’s rules, the old company should have ceased to be entitled to hold a share on that date, as they had already ceased to be the owner and operator of a club.”
I am reluctant to disagree with the astute folk at STV, but I will on this point.
It is quite correct that Rangers Football Club PLC (RFC PLC) is no longer entitled to hold a share in the SPL as it is no longer the owner and operator of a football club. However, until the share is transferred successfully by Duff & Phelps, or until the SPL force the transfer, RFC PLC still holds the share and can use it to attend meetings and to vote.
In addition, it is entitled to choose anyone to attend the meeting on its behalf, and as there would not seem to be any conflict of interest between RFC PLC and Sevco Scotland Ltd, it is entirely in order for Mr Green to attend figuratively bearing the RFC PLC Share Certificate.
Another member of the SPL could object at the meeting to RFC PLC being represented and voting, and the Chairman would have to decide on that objection. As no one objected at the last SPL meeting, it is unlikely anyone will do so today.
However, it does create what would be a bizarre scenario where, being no longer entitled to hold a share, RFC PLC, in the form of Mr Green, could vote in favour of a resolution proposing that Sevco Scotland be admitted to the SPL, even where a motion of similar effect was defeated only days ago!
As far as the SPL share is concerned, I would expect the procedure to be as follows.
First of all, the SPL will decide who is to replace Rangers in the SPL.
Then the members will vote to approve a transfer of the share from RFC PLC to the new team, whether Dundee or Dunfermline.
If D+P fail to complete the relevant paperwork to effect the transfer, then the vote would should also empower a Director of the SPL to complete the necessary paperwork, thus ensuring that the new team in the SPL actually has a share in it.
However, depending on how the agenda for today is drawn up, that specific resolution might not be before the meeting, and therefore that would require a further general meeting at least 14 days from now, to allow for adequate notice to be given. The agenda could include two alternative motions – the first approving the transfer of the SPL share from RFC PLC to Dundee or Dunfermline, and the second authorising the SPL to do the necessary should D+P fail to comply.
I know that the issue of the RGC PLC share and its voting rights is one on which there has been some legal debate over the last couple of weeks. It is likely to be academic as there may not be any votes where the presence of Mr Green makes a difference to the outcome, but should the vote on Dundee v Dunfermline be decided by one vote, and the RFC PLC vote was cast in the majority, I could see more arguments ahead.
Looking at the appearance of the whole thing, it does look strange indeed that a company in administration, which has solid all its assets, and which is therefore not a football team owner or operator van attend and vote in a meeting of football clubs, and at the same time have the man at the top of the company which bought the assets, but which is not a member of the SPL or the SFA, attend the meeting on its behalf!
All perfectly legal – all very strange looking!
Posted by Paul McConville