SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[WorldChampions1902]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Spot on

 From someone with experience of commercial litigation  which in effect this would be and of hearing QCs opinions.

The better test of the chances of success is who has the deeper pockets - us or them.

As you are someone with “experience of litigation,”, I would genuinely be interested in your views on the following scenario:-

 

You have x years experience as a Solicitor at law firm xyz.

You are an LLP (Limited Liability Partner) at that time with law firm xyz.

Later in your career, you subsequently hold the CEO position in a National Sporting organisation.
That National Sporting organisation subsequently appoints the same law firm xyz to its panel of law advisers.

The law firm xyz trumpets this appointment in a fanfare of publicity and quotes the aforementioned CEO, but there is absolutely no mention of that person having previously been employed by law firm xyz.

Out of the top 50 law firms, law firm xyz is ranked near the bottom end in the rankings table.

The good offices of law firm xyz look destined to be engaged in a high profile case, with the aforementioned CEO of that National Sporting organisation who it transpires is a key cause for that complaint.

How would you view the above scenario? It doesn’t look good, does it? And it would look a damn site worse if the LLP was a sleeping partner. Not that I am suggesting any impropriety here - not at all. But it doesn’t look good or very “professional”.

 

Thoughts?

 

[Gambo]

With Mr Andersons close links to Ann, will this be the 3rd time we have saved Hibs?😁

[stuart500]

I think Hearts have snared Doncaster into a very clever trap.

 

Doncaster's first reaction to Hearts' benefactor's cash is to be adamant that cash payments cant be seen to influence a sporting outcome. In other words it would be wrong to tie it to a condition to reconstruct the leagues to save Hearts.

 

So why then did he tie cash payments to the sporting outcome of ending the league on a points per game basis?

 

His current stance on the Anderson cash has meant he has effectively confirmed that the first vote was unfair and flawed.

 

A gift for a competent QC in court.

 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

7 minutes ago, will-i-am-a-jambo said:

 

The bit in bold, lm assuming you are referring to Neil Doncaster? Have there really been articles in Private Eye about him? If so, l would be interested in what they had to say. Thanks.

 

Murdo MacLennan 

 

 

[Unknown user]

52 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

But in acting on behalf of its members doesn't the SPFL rely on funds from its members? If not we can bring the whole house of cards down simply be taking the SPFL to court.

And if so, why haven't we? 

Of course it affects clubs, the spfl is the source of income, but if we sue and win the money comes from the company we're suing. Letters don't go out to their shareholders, if you have shares in British gas and they get sued are you expecting a bill through the door?

Edited June 1, 2020 by Smithee

[SUTOL]

3 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

There is no chance we’d get anywhere near that figure 

there’s no guarantee we’d even win any case.

dont get me wrong I’d love you to be correct but I think £5 million is fantasy stuff.

 

Annis quoted as saying £3-4 million as a minimum loss of income, due to being expelled. Plus who knows how much more if there is not a full league campaign, and presumably a similar amount if there is no promotion at the end of the season. Plus legal expenses (if we win). Would we settle out of court for £3m ? Who knows, but we probably would for £5m. 

 

In court and we win, even if playing a full fixture list, okay £5m was maybe overstating it but, easily £3m +. 

 

 

[gowestjambo]

36 minutes ago, neilnunb said:

 

 

Used to work in Baillie Gifford years and years ago and it was full of Hibs fans. Hopefully any that work there are all penning resignation letters in protest. 😀

 

Obviously they were the goffers and not the Movers and shakers.....

[SUTOL]

8 minutes ago, Pilmuir said:

Maybe, but it’s “us” I am worried about. And so should we all be.

 

Should other clubs be as well? 

 

 

[flecktimus]

 

[AHS51]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Murdo MacLennan 

 

 

 

He was definitely in charge of emails for the resolution votes. "Needed regular tutorials on how to use his phone" 🤣🤣

[will-i-am-a-jambo]

8 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

he means mclennan not doncaster

 

Ah ok cheers, appreciated.

[1874robbo]

2 minutes ago, SUTOL said:

 

Annis quoted as saying £3-4 million as a minimum loss of income, due to being expelled. Plus who knows how much more if there is not a full league campaign, and presumably a similar amount if there is no promotion at the end of the season. Plus legal expenses (if we win). Would we settle out of court for £3m ? Who knows, but we probably would for £5m. 

 

In court and we win, even if playing a full fixture list, okay £5m was maybe overstating it but, easily £3m +. 

 

 

I’d rather we stay up if I’m perfectly honest 

a court case worries me in the sense it would be in the lap of the gods 

[will-i-am-a-jambo]

5 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Murdo MacLennan 

 

 

 

Cheers Mikey, he sounds useless, quite apt for Scottish football then depressingly!

[Mikey1874]

Just now, will-i-am-a-jambo said:

 

Cheers Mikey, he sounds useless, quite apt for Scottish football then depressingly!

 

Yeah

 

Private Eye will be loving someone seriously reputable coming on the scene to properly show things up. 

[Heartsmad1874]

3 hours ago, CavySlaveJambo said:

On the relegation with no league to play in. The EFL have confirmed Stevenage (or with today’s latest charge against them Macclesfield) will not be relegated unless the National League goes ahead next season. 
 

Something that the people in Hampden are all too willing to do. 

That situation in EFL makes no sense atall, Bury got expelled last year so their are only 71 members. They should cancel relegation and just promote whoever was top (Barrow i think) seems like EFL have taken leave of their senses aswell as the SPFL.

[Captain Canada]

11 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Of course it affects clubs, the spfl is the source of income, but if we sue and win the money comes from the company we're suing. Letters don't go out to their shareholders, if you have shares in British gas and they get used are you expecting a bill through the door?

 

I'm curious as to how this would work as I've no legal knowledge at all.

 

The SPFL recently said it doesn't hold any cash reserves so if we were to sue and win damages, what happens then if it's the company that's liable? 

 

Also, how could they even afford to defend a case if they have no money? Would that money need to come from clubs or be borrowed against future TV income earmarked for them? 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Captain Canada

[Unknown user]

22 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

The point is that limited liability only takes you so far. It doesn't protect directors in every situation. And where the directors are doing the bidding of the shareholders, it doesn't protect them either.

 

If you can find a similar case I'll read up on it, I don't doubt there's been the odd exceptional circumstance, but legal liability lies with the company as a matter of course. To say "all of the member clubs will be equally liable in a court action" just isn't true.

[Jeff]

4 minutes ago, will-i-am-a-jambo said:

 

Cheers Mikey, he sounds useless, quite apt for Scottish football then depressingly!

 

He looks a bit like one of the Jackass guys has been made up to look like an 80 year old

[SUTOL]

2 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

I’d rather we stay up if I’m perfectly honest 

a court case worries me in the sense it would be in the lap of the gods 

 

I can't decide which I'd prefer!  

 

But I suspect a court case even if we won would not be such a great event as some seem to think and probaly wouldn't bring down Doncaster et al. 

 

Staying up after all this, immaterial of the reasons now would see some amount of anger/vitriol/hatred from virtually every other club in the country. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SUTOL]

3 minutes ago, Captain Canada said:

 

I'm curious as to how this would work as I've no legal knowledge at all.

 

The SPFL recently said it doesn't hold any cash reserves so if we were to sue and win damages, what happens then if it's the company that's liable? 

 

Also, how could they even afford to defend a case if they have no money? Would that money need to come from clubs or be borrowed against future TV income earmarked for them? 

 

The SPFL is a legal entity. If it, through its officers does something wrong it can be prosecuted. 

 

There may be something in the constitution/articles of association of the company with reference to liability for legal actions. 

[niblick1874]

6 hours ago, Rudi51 said:

 

None of this feels right. I am getting the frying pan and fire feeling. I am smelling something. I am not liking the idea of this guy Doncaster and Maclennan together. Are we some kind of conduit. Something is not sitting well with me. I want a court case now. It has to be now before we are sucked into a black hole of their making.    

[Jambo66]

16 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Of course it affects clubs, the spfl is the source of income, but if we sue and win the money comes from the company we're suing. Letters don't go out to their shareholders, if you have shares in British gas and they get sued are you expecting a bill through the door?

Completely different, but I'm sure you know that.

[Captain Canada]

1 minute ago, SUTOL said:

 

The SPFL is a legal entity. If it, through its officers does something wrong it can be prosecuted. 

 

There may be something in the constitution/articles of association of the company with reference to liability for legal actions. 

 

Cheers. I can't see any scenario where a court case would be worth it for them or the clubs. It seems they have a lot more to lose than us. 

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

Completely different, but I'm sure you know that.

No need to be a dick about it, I'm discussing in good faith.

 

The SPFL is a corporation which specifically reduces liability to shareholders. If you can show me how the member clubs are then equally liable in court though I'm all ears.

[SUTOL]

1 minute ago, Captain Canada said:

 

Cheers. I can't see any scenario where a court case would be worth it for them or the clubs. It seems they have a lot more to lose than us. 

 

As a follow up to my post, it states in last years accounts of the SPFL that:

 

"The Companies Articles of Association require that no payment may be made to members unless and until provision has been made to meet all of the Companies liabilities to third parties."

 

So if they know about a court case they will need to hold back paying out whatever the amount is we will be claiming, plus their (and our) court costs. 

 

When do they get the Sky money? 

 

[Jambo66]

11 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

If you can find a similar case I'll read up on it, I don't doubt there's been the odd exceptional circumstance, but legal liability lies with the company as a matter of course. To say "all of the member clubs will be equally liable in a court action" just isn't true.

I don't have time to go and find similar cases I'm afraid. However, earlier in this thread there was a lot of discussion about contingent liabilities and the fact that directors can be held personally liable for company debts in a liquidation situation. The directors may well have obtained personal guarantees from the shareholders.

Alternatively, the vote of the members to expel 3 clubs from their rightful division if proved, is likely to give the clubs personal liability.

That's just 2 possibilities.

[Captain Canada]

Just now, SUTOL said:

 

As a follow up to my post, it states in last years accounts of the SPFL that:

 

"The Companies Articles of Association require that no payment may be made to members unless and until provision has been made to meet all of the Companies liabilities to third parties."

 

So if they know about a court case they will need to hold back paying out whatever the amount is we will be claiming, plus their (and our) court costs. 

 

When do they get the Sky money? 

 

 

Thanks, that's interesting as I'm sure ND was quoted as saying they paid out all the money they had to clubs after the vote.

 

I believe the first installment of Sky money is due in August. 

[Jambo66]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

No need to be a dick about it, I'm discussing in good faith.

 

The SPFL is a corporation which specifically reduces liability to shareholders. If you can show me how the member clubs are then equally liable in court though I'm all ears.

Didn't mean to upset you, but surely you can see that a company owned by 42 shareholders who direct the company in all major decisions is very different from a quoted company with hundreds of thousands of shareholders with virtually no influence at all?

[manaliveits105]

How did shifty McLennan get the spfl job ffs 

[Victorian]

If a successful legal action shows that legal entity #1 (Hearts) has suffered a restriction of trade as a result of the actions of legal entity #2 (SPFL) and that damages are due,    I would have thought that one of two scenarios would result.

 

1.    That the SPFL would be liable for the damages and that the value of it's current commercial contracts (TV cash) would constitute an asset to be arrested in some way in order to settle the matter of damages.

 

2.    That the SPFL would be liable for the damages but that the value of it's commercial contracts could not be arrested in this way.    Since it would have no other way with which to settle the damages,    it would be forced into liquidation.     The commercial contracts it previously held would then cease to be.

[CavySlaveJambo]

25 minutes ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

That situation in EFL makes no sense atall, Bury got expelled last year so their are only 71 members. They should cancel relegation and just promote whoever was top (Barrow i think) seems like EFL have taken leave of their senses aswell as the SPFL.

Barrow are going up and then the National League are waiting on the EFL to decide about Relegation for holding their playoffs (so 2 up 1 down).  Or promoting Harrogate along with Barrow. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by CavySlaveJambo

[milky_26]

4 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

How did shifty McLennan get the spfl job ffs 

he also works for another of dermot desmonds company

[GinRummy]

4 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

How did shifty McLennan get the spfl job ffs 

Because of his connections to Celtic. 

[Unknown user]

11 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

I don't have time to go and find similar cases I'm afraid. However, earlier in this thread there was a lot of discussion about contingent liabilities and the fact that directors can be held personally liable for company debts in a liquidation situation. The directors may well have obtained personal guarantees from the shareholders.

Alternatively, the vote of the members to expel 3 clubs from their rightful division if proved, is likely to give the clubs personal liability.

That's just 2 possibilities.

Directors, liquidation - none of that means the shareholders are equally liable in a court case

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

This is getting boring as **** now. **** COVID and **** the SPFL

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

One pleasure today. 

 

Previously Lawwell,  McLennan, Doncaster,  even the lower League chumps  whoring themselves for their Andy Warhol moment. Add in that utter fraud Cosgrove and various other media fools.

 

They all thought they were going to patronize,  mock and condemn Ann Budge. 

 

Today, you can guarantee they all feel like the arseholes they truly are. 

[maroonsgotop]

23 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

 

None of this feels right. I am getting the frying pan and fire feeling. I am smelling something. I am not liking the idea of this guy Doncaster and Maclennan together. Are we some kind of conduit. Something is not sitting well with me. I want a court case now. It has to be now before we are sucked into a black hole of their making.    

suspect AB fully expects this to end up in Court and will be able to say she's looked at every scenario to try and save the Scottish Leagues but was rebuffed at every opportunity and also provided the caveat of putting one of our benefactors forward to the SPFL as further evidence of her sincerity to help ALL Clubs. In Court she'll be able to say  " I did my very best m'lud but instead Hearts were expelled from the top flight into a league unable to fulfill it's full programme of matches and as a consequence this has cost us £xm  due to restricted trading which I would very much like compensation for." 

[Unknown user]

12 minutes ago, Victorian said:

If a successful legal action shows that legal entity #1 (Hearts) has suffered a restriction of trade as a result of the actions of legal entity #2 (SPFL) and that damages are due,    I would have thought that one of two scenarios would result.

 

1.    That the SPFL would be liable for the damages and that the value of it's current commercial contracts (TV cash) would constitute an asset to be arrested in some way in order to settle the matter of damages.

 

2.    That the SPFL would be liable for the damages but that the value of it's commercial contracts could not be arrested in this way.    Since it would have no other way with which to settle the damages,    it would be forced into liquidation.     The commercial contracts it previously held would then cease to be.

Re 2, as sutol posted above

 

"The Companies Articles of Association require that no payment may be made to members unless and until provision has been made to meet all of the Companies liabilities to third parties."

[Jambo-Fox]

10 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

This is getting boring as **** now. **** COVID and **** the SPFL

👍  even Brexit was more exciting!

 

I’m sure there will be a flurry of ‘statements’ later this week to make it more exciting!

[One five]

35 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

 

None of this feels right. I am getting the frying pan and fire feeling. I am smelling something. I am not liking the idea of this guy Doncaster and Maclennan together. Are we some kind of conduit. Something is not sitting well with me. I want a court case now. It has to be now before we are sucked into a black hole of their making.    

I’m getting the same feeling tbh , I just don’t trust Doncaster and Maclennan full stop.

[niblick1874]

4 minutes ago, maroonsgotop said:

suspect AB fully expects this to end up in Court and will be able to say she's looked at every scenario to try and save the Scottish Leagues but was rebuffed at every opportunity and also provided the caveat of putting one of our benefactors forward to the SPFL as further evidence of her sincerity to help ALL Clubs. In Court she'll be able to say  " I did my very best m'lud but instead Hearts were expelled from the top flight into a league unable to fulfill it's full programme of matches and as a consequence this has cost us £xm  due to restricted trading which I would very much like compensation for." 

 

Court now.

[EIEIO]

11 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

One pleasure today. 

 

Previously Lawwell,  McLennan, Doncaster,  even the lower League chumps  whoring themselves for their Andy Warhol moment. Add in that utter fraud Cosgrove and various other media fools.

 

They all thought they were going to patronize,  mock and condemn Ann Budge. 

 

Today, you can guarantee they all feel like the arseholes they truly are. 

Tremendously well summarised. Even the pundits on Saturday's Sportsound rumbled Doncaster FFS.

[TheBigO]

58 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Murdo MacLennan 

 

 

The most revealing line here is about him allowing banks and businesses to censor coverage

[Malinga the Swinga]

15 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

he also works for another of dermot desmonds company

Really sad when, despite being a failure at previous jobs, Shifty was handed a well paid job simply because he sucks the cock of Dermot Desmond and toes the Celtic line.

 

The control in Scottish football exercised by these ***** from Parkhead is an absolute disgrace, and the willingness of the Scottish media, to not just ignore it, but to willingly condone it, further stokes the realisation that the media in this country, at every level, is another disgrace.

[Heartsmad1874]

17 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Directors, liquidation - none of that means the shareholders are equally liable in a court case

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/neil-doncaster-hearts-legal-action-would-see-41-other-spfl-clubs-suffer-2859578
 

Here are some main quotes from it.

 

But any action that's taken by any member against the league ultimately is taken against members as a whole.

 

"We don't hold reserves year to year, so any action that any one individual club takes, effectively the burden of that would fall on all the other members."

[Don Dan]

 

 

 

Why would you need to work to develop a concrete proposal, am I thick or something! Just say here’s our bank details or ask the clubs to forward there bank details. Divide it up equally so there’s no one screwed over like we were.

[Heartsmad1874]

25 minutes ago, CavySlaveJambo said:

Barrow are going up and then the National League are waiting on the EFL to decide about Relegation for holding their playoffs (so 2 up 1 down).  Or promoting Harrogate along with Barrow. 

Weren’t the League Two clubs voting to end the season but with no relegation? The simple way is just to promote Barrow and no relegation, very bizarre.

[maroonsgotop]

1 minute ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/neil-doncaster-hearts-legal-action-would-see-41-other-spfl-clubs-suffer-2859578
 

Here are some main quotes from it.

 

But any action that's taken by any member against the league ultimately is taken against members as a whole.

 

"We don't hold reserves year to year, so any action that any one individual club takes, effectively the burden of that would fall on all the other members."

excellent news. slowly slowly catch the monkey

[Victorian]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Re 2, as sutol posted above

 

"The Companies Articles of Association require that no payment may be made to members unless and until provision has been made to meet all of the Companies liabilities to third parties."

 

That's fine then.    It seems pretty clear that the SPFL as a company will carry the liability of damages in the event of it losing a legal action.     The members would not be directly liable as such but it would follow that,    after third party liabilities were met,    there would be less swill in the trough for daddy pig,  mummy pig and the wee piglets to survive on.

 

I wonder how the SPFL as a legal entity,   with no reserves,   would even be able to undertake the cost of defending a legal action.    

[niblick1874]

1 minute ago, One five said:

I’m getting the same feeling tbh , I just don’t trust Doncaster and Maclennan full stop.

 

Sometimes there is no more. That time is now and now is the time to go with what we have. To not do so will tell me we have soled out. It has to be now.