2007 - 2021

The Man from Team 12

Once again the media is failing and the rules of Scottish Football, are being ignored. These are SPL articles…

6. A Share may only be issued, allotted, transferred to or held by a person who is the owner and operator of a Club and if a Member shall cease to be the owner and operator of a Club then such Member shall cease to be entitled to hold a Share.

14. If:-
(i) a Member shall cease to be entitled to hold a Share; or
(ii) a trustee in sequestration, manager, receiver or administrative receiver shall be appointed in respect of a Member or any property of a Member, or an administration order shall be made in respect of a Member or any property of a Member or an order shall be made or an effective resolution passed for the winding up of a Member otherwise than for the purpose of reconstruction or amalgamation;
then that Member or its manager, receiver, administrative receiver, administrator or liquidator or any other person entitled to the Share shall, on receiving notice in writing from the Board following the Company in General Meeting passing a Qualified Resolution that such notice should be issued by the Board and confirming the identity of the proposed transferee, transfer its Share to such other person as the Board shall direct at the price of £1 and the Club owned and operated by such Member shall forthwith cease to be a member of the League and the Club owned and operated by the transferee shall become a member of the League in its place.

RFC(IA) hold the SPL Share.

D&P claim to have sold the “club” to Sevco.

RFC(IA) have ceased to be the owner and operator of a Club, therefore they have ceased (under SPL Article 6) to be entitled to hold a Share.

Article 14 tells us that a Qualified Resolution is required to agree who gets RFC(IA)’s share.

A Qualified Resolution required a 21 day notice period for the General Meeting AND must be passed with a 90% majority.

1. Rangers don’t get to vote.
2. 10 from the 11 remaining clubs have to agree to the recipient of the RFC(IA) Share.

Please don’t let Doncaster away with ignoring the SPL Articles.
Don’t allow the 8-4 myth to become reality.

Remind everyone – Article 6 & Article 14 are written for the current situation.

Comments (0)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. ian says:

    since rfc went into administration on 14th february i think they changed the rules mate

  2. There are differing opinions about Article 6. I think that, until the share is removed (which is where Article 14 comes in) the holder of it, in this case Rangers Football Club PLC (In Administration) can still vote.

    Whether that is “right” is another question. In my view it is “correct”.

    Re Article 14, as I said in my insomnia inducing blog post – http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/why-rangers-can-vote-on-4th-july-and-how-the-spl-and-rangers-are-in-error/

    “Under Article 14, where a Member is no longer entitled to hold a share, the share can be removed from it and transferred to another party, effectively by force. This involves a General Meeting of the Members passing a Qualified Resolution instructing the Board to write to the Member instructing the transfer of the share to a named transferee. That transfer causes the transferor’s club no longer to be a member of the league. If the no longer entitled Member fails to effect the transfer, then the SPL can enforce the transfer by filling out the papers itself.

    That procedure will not take place prior to the vote on 4th July and therefore Rangers PLC will have the right to vote.”

    Article 14 comes into play when the SPL decide to remove the share of a member no longer entitled to it. That is not what the 4 July meeting is doing. It is instead deciding whether to approve the transfer of the share under Article 11.

    As I posted, it might be entirely the wrong question the meeting is considering, but then the meeting can only consider what it is asked to. It would be a terrible error if between them Sevco and Duff & Phelps have asked the wrong question.

  3. bellacaledonia says:

    Thanks Paul, there seems mass confusion here. Are they a new entity or are they not? It seems they are being considered as both, which seems unfair.

    In my understanding they are a new entity, which is why these articles stand, and they can’t vote – but would absolve them of past misdemeanors.

  4. Rangers.co.uk seems to think it is a continuing entity. http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/football-news/article/2815580

    “Gers would need at least a two thirds majority in their favour to retain their place amongst the Scottish game’s elite.”

  5. I presume that someone needs to take positive action over RFC’s lack of entitlement to hold a share before it is stripped from them. It appears to be theirs by default unless and until it is taken from them.

  6. Offshorebairn says:

    Love how the SPL still gets described as ‘Elite’
    Elitist maybe?

  7. M Hoard says:

    Rangers FC have not been liquidated – they have not been handed over to BDO yet. Technically, the club is still in administration – having failed to exit administration via a CVA.

    Liquidation could take months.

    This is why Rangers FC has a vote. The oldco is proposing the transfer of thier SPL share to Charles Green’s newco.

    You should check your facts effort running off at the mouth.

    1. bellacaledonia says:

      ‘Rangers FC have not been liquidated’

      1. M Hoard says:

        That’s completely correct. The company has *not* been liquidated – yet. It’s not in the hands of the liquidators – yet. It’s still in administration – and will still be in administration on 4 July for the vote. Unless you geniuses have information or proof that suggests otherwise? Do a bit of homework before you publish nonsense like this. Try phoning BDO (the liquidators) and asking them – they’ll tell you the same. Their number is on their website http://www.bdo.uk.com

  8. bigrab says:

    Duff and Phelps are entitled to a vote as administrators. Rangers (In Administration) are still er…. in administration and the (irrevocable) agreement with Green and co proceeds only in the event of a CVA or liquidation.

    How can Green have purchased the assets from the liquidator when the liquidator hasn’t yet taken over from the administrator?

    Just because you wish something were true doesn’t make it so. However if the SPL clubs are as brave as their words then it looks like D&P’s vote is worthless and that the Killie Boys could be Sevco’s only real friends.

    Although I understand there is a long way to go on the negotiation front, it looks like an SFA sponsored head of steam is building for Sevco to play in Division 1 (or SPL 2) next season.

    One of the points at issue is to allow a play off place for the runner up in Division 1/SPL2. Sevco may need that!

    There is still a possibility that there will be no Ibrox side playing anywhere next season. A remote possibility I’ll grant you, but a possibility nonetheless.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.