pete 2,499 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 At what level does a gagging order stop. Is it only King who should have the information or can he congress with the board of Rangers. What about the shareholders, do they not have a right to have an insight into contracts? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) Imho and not clued up legal mind, i think Ashley has interpreted the gagging order far to wide and to draconian. Don't think it was ever meant to cover everything Ashley demands? Hopefully Judge Smith will put the Rotund Rodent correct on legal matters. Edited January 22, 2016 by aweebluesoandso 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,471 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 At what level does a gagging order stop. Is it only King who should have the information or can he congress with the board of Rangers. I would imagine that anyone within the club can have the information but they are prevented from discussing t externally. What about the shareholders, do they not have a right to have an insight into contracts? No, shareholders do not have any rights to that, or else you would have every Celtic fan being one share and asking to see every contract. Shareholders do not have any rights to see any (commercially sensitive) contracts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,974 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) Written Judgement https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/sports-direct-international-plc-v-rangers-international-football-club-plc-and-david-king-2/ The Guardian are running the story and at this moment in time it is their Number One UK News Headline (Online edition) Judge attacks Mike Ashley for abusing legal system against Rangers boss http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news Edited January 22, 2016 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Details of the confidential agreement between Ashley and the then board, Easdale. http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1339992-dave-king-cleared-over-mike-ashley-gagging-order-breach-allegations/ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 5,994 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 PhilCo told us that Big Mick's tanks were parked on the Ibrox lawn. I do hope those 80 ton behemoths are equipped with reverse gears? Still, the usual suspects can assist by resorting to crowd funding to provide Big Mick with the means to get a dozen low loaders down to Edmiston Drive. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,367 Posted January 22, 2016 Author Share Posted January 22, 2016 Details of the confidential agreement between Ashley and the then board, Easdale. http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1339992-dave-king-cleared-over-mike-ashley-gagging-order-breach-allegations/ One does wonder about the legality of the signatory/contract... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 5,994 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 One does wonder about the legality of the signatory/contract... As we know, Ashley has a couple of cases pending against the SFA. The perceived legal wisdom is he will lose both cases. I wonder how close big Mike is from being the recipient of a contempt order for vexatious litigation? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,974 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 As we know, Ashley has a couple of cases pending against the SFA. The perceived legal wisdom is he will lose both cases. I wonder how close big Mike is from being the recipient of a contempt order for vexatious litigation? Or how close he is from cashing in his chips.............. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 One does wonder about the legality of the signatory/contract... The Judge uses the word unusual a lot in his summation. 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.