Frankie 8,652 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmnw/mike_ashley_rangers_and_the_sports_direct_share_register_857955/index.shtml I bought a single share in Sports Direct International and then I requested a copy of their share register. Their company secretary then wrote asking why I wanted the register and I explained thus:- Mr Cameron Olsen, The Company Secretary, Sports Direct International, Monday 16 February 2015 Dear Mr Olsen, Thank you for your letter of the 9th February requesting me to explain the purpose of my request to obtain the shareholders register. As you will be aware, Section 116 of the Companies Act enables a shareholder to request a copy of the company's register of members where this constitutes a proper purpose. As a shareholder I am concerned over the bad publicity the company has been receiving over its use of zero hours contracts and the retail agreements in place with RIFC plc which have also caused a large amount of detrimental publicity which may damage the share price. I wish to canvass my fellow shareholders as to whether they would be willing to support resolutions to end the use of zero hours contracts and to review the terms of the retail agreements with RIFC plc to ensure that these generate sales revenue that benefits shareholders; rather than the current agreements which whilst appearing to be favourable are generating low sales volumes due to the level of hostility amongst the public to what are viewed as unfair terms. I look forward to receiving the register so that I can canvass my fellow shareholders to ensure that we are able to ensure that the business does not continue to be involved in contracts which damage the long term interests of shareholders. Regarding the requested fee of £65, my understanding is that as a member of the company, under Section 116, that this information should be available for free. I have laid out the appropriate section below: Section 116 Rights to inspect and require copies (1)The register and the index of members' names must be open to the inspection— . (a)of any member of the company without charge, and . If my understanding is incorrect, or the company feels this is too great a financial encumbrance, then I will, of course, send a cheque subject to your advice. I would prefer the copy of the register to be in electronic form. Yours sincerely, MARK DINGWALL The same day Sport Direct lawyers made an application to the Companies Court in London seeking the following - 1/ That the Claimant shall not comply with the request of Mr Mark DIngwall by letter dated 3 February 2015 for a a copy of the Claimant’s register of members. 2/ That they “shall not comply with any future request (whether made by Mark Dingwall or any other person) to inspect the Claimant’s register of members or for a copy of that register where the only purpose given for the request is to enable members to be contacted, without identifying the subject matter and purpose of such contact: 3/ Mark Dingwall do pay the Claimant’s costs, such costs to be assessed if not agreed. The hearing is set for 11.30 on 14th April. I can understand a company not wishing to hand out it’s share register willy-nilly but the principle is that sensible shareholders dis-satisfied with the performance of a company should be able to seek out other shareholders and canvass their opinions. In my original request I undertook not to share the register with anyone else and not to contact the shareholders regarding anything other than the company’s affairs. By moving to strike out my request; and specifically to set the precedent that neither I nor any other shareholder can in the future obtain a copy of the register; Sports Direct are seeking to remove one vital right whereby shareholders can seek to enforce their rights by lobbying other investors in the company. I have had some free advice so far but with the 14th April looming I think engaging a lawyer would be the sensible way to go. FF.com exists on a hand to mouth basis - we have no rich and mysterious backers nor plentiful sources of income. If we can settle outside of court or are otherwise successful then the balance will, of course, be donated to charitable causes after consultation with the donors. If you can help then make a donation via Paypal - http://tinyurl.com/FF-SDLegal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP_Greg 0 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Strange one - shareholders are entitled to the register I thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,652 Posted March 26, 2015 Author Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) Strange one - shareholders are entitled to the register I thought. I think we've seen many times Ashley appears to think he's beyond the law - or will at least stretch it as far as possible to his benefit using the resources at his disposal. This seems like bullying to me - nothing more, nothing less. Edited March 26, 2015 by Frankie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP_Greg 0 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I think we've seen many times Ashley appears to think he's beyond the law - or will at least stretch it as far as possible to his benefit using the resources at his disposal. This seems like bullying to be - nothing more, nothing less. Could be - I wonder if there is precedent Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,422 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Could be - I wonder if there is precedent A precedent for wealthy people beginning legal proceedings to encourage less wealthy people to back down, yes, I think so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 That's outrageous behaviour by Sports Direct. I hope he goes to court and the judge throws the book at them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Good luck mark. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg_Mcnoleg 50 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 This is clearly malicious, and designed to intimidate. Sincerely hopes it's thrown out with plenty of bad publicity for SD. Despicable bastards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSolace 0 Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Ashley needs booted offshore to a place London does not even do business with. Despicable, odious man with little humanity and displaying all the signs of a paranoid, narcissitic sociopath hiding from public scrutiny. Poor man was probably routinely buggered as a child. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,803 Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 The headline is a bit misleading, I'd like to remark. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts