The QC of Choice for Rangers Fans Gets a New Job!

Richard Keen QC, the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, has found his way into the minds of football fans through his high-profile involvement in matters connected to the Rangers saga.

To the universal acclaim of the Rangers faithful he acted for “Rangers” in the court challenge to the Disciplinary Tribunal imposition of a year-long registration “embargo” in 2012. He successfully persuaded the court that the Tribunal had exceeded its powers.

He re-appeared on the legal football field when acting last month for the “Rangers Rebels” and he succeeded in establishing that the Board had breached the Companies Act by refusing to allow the motion to appoint four new directors to be considered at the RIFC PLC AGM.

Charles Green’s Statement Tonight Regarding Rangers’ Appeal – Words Fail Me (Not Really)

Mr Green, who is the man in pole position to take over the running of Rangers, has issued a statement tonight. As it follows on from my last couple of posts, I thought I would offer some commentary on it.

With the greatest of respect to Mr Green, I think his statement tonight is nonsense. He mis-states some of the effects of Lord Glennie’s decision; he talks about wanting a speedy resolution, whilst at the same time flagging up various reasons for delay; he repeats the “received wisdom” that as the people responsible for the “misdeeds” as he calls them are no longer there at Ibrox, this should temper the sanction imposed, notwithstanding that Rangers benefited from those same “misdeeds”; and he cites the good of Scottish football as reasons for a reduced penalty, whilst grossly overstating the importance of Rangers’ position in the Scottish Cup.

As is usual, my thoughts are noted in bold where relevant.

Take it away Mr Green!

What Might Happen to Rangers at the Re-Heard Appellate Tribunal?

In which I attempt to answer the question of what Lord Carloway’s Appellate Tribunal will decide about an additional sanction on Rangers. In the process of reaching a conclusion on this, I consider the following.

What did the Judicial Panel think of the gravity of Rangers’ offence?

What options are open to the Appellate Tribunal?

Why I do not think ejection from the Scottish Cup is either competent or appropriate.

What effect would suspension, expulsion or termination have on Rangers.

What could Mr Green do, in the event of any of the above three penalties being imposed?

Can Rangers agree a shorter Signing Ban with the SFA?

What will happen?

If unhappy with the decision can Rangers appeal further, whether to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, or to the Court of Session?

And I conclude with a foray into Shakespearean adaptation!

—————————————-

I was idly leafing through my copy of Shakespeare, as I do once every ten years or so, and happened upon the Merchant of Venice. It struck me that there are certain whimsical similarities between the story of the Merchant and his desire to follow the precise wording of his contract, ignoring the spirit thereof, and the fate which then befalls him for his adherence to the letter, and the situation pertaining to Rangers after their undoubted success in persuading Lord Glennie to overturn the signing ban imposed by the AT chaired by Lord Carloway.

Rather than inflict my adaptation of the Bard’s work at the top of the piece, I have put it at the end. Feel free to read it, or not, as you think fit. I like it, but then I adapted it!

—————————————-

Now, after that brief theatrical interlude, we are back to the dense legal stuff.

Why Did Lord Glennie Find in Favour of Rangers in the Judicial Review against the SFA?

In which I go through Lord Glennie’s judgement and try to make sense of it.

The Herald has been kind enough to post the opinion of Lord Glennie in relation to Rangers’ “appeal” against the signing ban imposed by the SFA. Michael Grant’s article on it is here, and is worth a read.

You can see the full judgement here – Opinion of Lord Glennie in Petition of Rangers Football Club PLC for Judicial Review

I propose to go through it in some detail, and in a later post wrote about what might happen going forward. For clarity, the Judicial Panel (JP) is that chaired by Gary Allan QC which imposed the signing ban initially. The Appellate Tribunal (AT) was that chaired by Lord Carloway which upheld the decision. The relevant documents used in determining the decision were the Articles of Association of the SFA (Articles) and the Judicial Panel Protocol (JPP).

I would say is that, without the resources to have legally qualified, or at least legally attuned, reporters present throughout the hearing, it was always going to be difficult for the media to cover this case properly. The coverage there had been was confusing, and indeed one lawyer with whom I engaged on Twitter indicated that the disposal from the bench had not made especially clear what the precise decision was, other than Rangers had been successful in having the signing ban declared outwith the powers (“ultra vires”) of the JP. However, having sight of the decision makes all these matters crystal clear, and I hope not to muddy the waters in explaining it myself!