Latest news with #CourtofSession
The Herald Scotland
10 hours ago
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Rangers reach settlement over 'costly' fans pre-payment card lawsuit
The news emerged during proceedings at the Court of Session on Friday. It is the latest hearing in an action brought by Reputation Exchange PLC who are seeking to recover undisclosed but 'significative compensation' from the Glasgow club. The company, known as REPX believes Rangers owe it money over an aborted agreement between the two sides. REPX says Rangers wanted it to develop a 'customised payment card' which would have allowed fans to buy products associated with it. However, the business claims that Rangers stopped the card from coming into operation. It says it was provided with legal advice from 'Scottish legal counsel' saying the club breached an agreement. The firm also claims that the alleged breach means it is entitled to compensation - it says that it invested a large amount of its own money into developing the card and it should be compensated for the sum it spent. The gates at Ibrox Stadium (Image: SNS Group) On Friday, Rangers's lawyer Timothy Young told Lord Sandison of the latest development in the case. The court had earlier heard from REPX'S advocate Ross Anderson who said that the agreement between the two sides still needed to be finalised. Mr Young said: 'I would echo what Mr Anderson has said about parties having reached an agreement in principle subject to entering into the settlement agreement. 'As my learned friend indicated - it's not so much that the agreement hasn't been reached. It's simply that implementation of that agreement will take some time. According REPX's website, the firm describes itself as being a 'fintech company' that is 'disrupting' traditional banking. It states: 'REPX is creating for celebrities, influencers, sport teams, brands, iconic cities, the opportunity to monetize their fans base with unique co-branded prepaid cards, debit cards, and patented digital products catered to their loyal legions of followers and fans' It started working with Rangers to design a prepaid card after making similar products for Italian sides AC Milan and Torino. In the firm's strategic report for the year ending December 31 2023, the company talks of initiating a legal action against a football club which it doesn't name. The report states: 'The company initiated legal action against a football club to recover the advance paid to acquire the right to issue branded prepaid cards, as well as to recover the loss of profit and/or cost of investments made to develop an app customized to the wishes of the club itself. 'Below are some key extracts from the letter sent by our lawyers to the other side, anticipating that proceedings will be commenced against the football club without further delay should it not be possible to resolve the claims in early course "Our Client has also had the benefit of advice from senior counsel on Clause 12 of the contract.'Our Client (REPX) has suffered significant losses as a result of your client's breaches of contract. Our Client maintains claims against Your Client under the following heads.' It states the failed scheme created losses of £1.5million on top of £500,000 in 'aborted costs' including design work. They say this is on top of further £120,000 in cash they had paid the club as part of an agreement to launch the card in August 2023 before the plan was shelved. Bosses are also claiming a further £20,000 for 'costs and wasted management time'. In a letter sent to the council of the Cyprus Stock Exchange on December 27 2024, REPX directors state that 'the company has started a costly lawsuit against the Scottish club. Rangers fans (Image: SNS Group) Rangers FC who had a customised payment card created to their specifications.' It further states: 'REPX invested several hundred thousand GBP in technology and one year of development) and then effectively blocked the issuance of the card on instrumental grounds that even the Scottish Legal Counsel (which carries significant weight in Scotland) who provided us with the prior legal advice to start the legal process dismissed as unfounded. 'In fact the Scottish Legal Counsel invited us to assert our right to a substantial refund of the amount invested on the basis of the Scottish club's claims. we We believe we should be entitled to receive a significative compensation.' On Friday, Mr Anderson said: 'The parties have reached a commercial settlement.' Lord Sandison expressed concern about the state of the settlement agreement. He said that he wasn't content to end the action at the close of Friday's hearing because of the lack of detail provided to the court. He said that unless parties could finalise the details of the agreement, they would be expected to come to court to participate in a proof - the Scottish legal term used to describe the main hearing in civil cases - next month. Lord Sandison told the two advocates: 'I'm not asking you in any way to disclose the terms of the settlement agreement. 'But let us hypothesis that it might be that one party is going to pay some money to the other party. 'What's going to happen to the agreement - I pose this question rhetorically - if that money is not paid on the day that it is supposed to be paid? 'Is there a settlement or is there not? If there is then there is no need to postpone the disposal of this action until implement because you have got a a binding agreement - which you can just come right back to court and say 'here's a binding agreement: it hasn't been performed, we want it to be performed.' He added: 'I think it's very common knowledge that i don't discharge diets - substantive diets - on the promise of a settlement one day.' He urged the two sides to finalise the agreement. He added 'I've hoped I've made it perfectly clear. I can't imagine that I haven't. Either this action settles before the start of the proof diet or it proceeds on the proof diet - loud and clear?'
STV News
12 hours ago
- Business
- STV News
Biffa £166m compensation claim over deposit return scheme 'good to go'
A lawyer acting for a company pursuing a £166m compensation claim against the Scottish Government has told a judge that his case is 'good to go' to court. Roddy Dunlop KC made the statement during a procedural hearing on Thursday in an action brought against Scottish ministers by Biffa Waste Services Ltd. The company has raised an action at the Court of Session in Edinburgh over a decision made by ministers to delay the introduction of the deposit return scheme. It alleges that Lorna Slater – the former minister for green skills, circular economy and biodiversity – gave negligent assurances to the firm in a letter about the initiative to ensure its participation. Biffa's lawyer Roddy Dunlop KC told judge Lord Clark last year that the correspondence made no reference to how Holyrood would need its Westminster counterpart to give the final go ahead to the scheme. The scheme was later scrapped after the Conservative government in London refused to give the go ahead for it be implemented. The firm believes the Scottish Government 'negligently misrepresented the assurance it gave' to Biffa. Biffa has instructed Mr Dunlop, the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, to act for it in the £166.2m compensation claim. Judge Lord Clark gave permission for the action to proceed following a two day hearing last year when the Scottish Government's lawyer Gerry Moynihan KC asked the court to dismiss the action. On Thursday, the case called again for a procedural hearing before judge Lord Sandison. Mr Dunlop said he and his legal team were making preparations for the case which is expected to be heard in the Court of Session over an eight day period in October 2025. Mr Dunlop added: 'The case is now simplified and good to go.' The deposit return scheme was a key policy of the former SNP-Green administration. Under the plans, a 20p deposit was be added to all single-use drinks containers made of PET plastic, metal or glass. Consumers could reclaim the deposit by returning the containers to retailers or to specially-designed reverse vending machines. It was due to be introduced in August 2023 but the launch date was pushed back, with then first minister Humza Yousaf citing concerns from businesses. The Conservative government at Westminster refused to grant the scheme the go-ahead unless it conformed to a UK-wide approach which excluded glass. In June 2023 Slater said she had no choice but to delay the scheme until at least October 2025, accusing the UK government of sabotage. She left government last year following the collapse of the Green-SNP power-sharing agreement. The company have decided to go to the Court of Session in Edinburgh because it believes the Holyrood government is responsible for it incurring a £166.2m loss. It wants compensation for the cash it invested in the collapsed deposit return scheme and the subsequent loss of profit. At the proceedings last year, Mr Moynihan said the Scottish Ministers acted lawfully and that the government did not act a duty of care to Biffa. He also said the letter sent by Ms Slater – which was dated May 17 2022 – did not amount to a 'negligent representation'. Speaking on the final day of a two day long hearing into whether the action should proceed, Mr Dunlop outlined the alleged actions of Ms Slater in dealing with his clients. Mr Dunlop said: 'Our position is that we did sign the contract in a situation of the assumption of responsibility. 'The minister was not required to give an assurance but she voluntarily did. 'She did so because she wanted Biffa on board. She must have known Biffa would act upon what she said. 'It is writing a letter that provides the assurances that not reflect the actuality of the situation. 'We know why she decided to write that letter. She wrote that letter as she needed the deposit return scheme to have a purpose. 'She needed a contractor like Biffa – who was swithering about whether to become involved – to become involved.' Mr Dunlop also claimed that Ms Slater's purpose in writing the letter to Biffa was to ensure the scheme's success. He added: 'The simple fact of the matter is that the Ministers were very keen to have Biffa on board. 'It was important for them politically and logistically to have a well resourced contractor like Biffa on board. 'Without that the deposit return scheme was dead in the water.' On Thursday, Lord Sandison fixed a date for another procedural hearing in the case – this will take place on September 2 2025. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Glasgow Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Glasgow Times
Tommy Sheridan says he is 'victimised' by Glasgow council
The Glasgow Health and Social Care Partnership informed Tommy that due to his 2011 perjury conviction and prison sentence, all future applications for employment would be denied, according to the BBC. He has challenged this decision at Scotland's highest civil court, the Court of Session. Tommy told BBC Scotland News that his gender critical views on trans rights were a factor in the decision by the SNP-run council. READ MORE: Tommy Sheridan refused social work job due to 'unacceptable risk', court hears Sheridan, who completed a master's degree in social work at Glasgow Caledonian University, told BBC Scotland that he had "no doubt whatsoever" that he was being blacklisted by the council. He said that this is because of his socialist background and his views on transgender issues, which he says conflict with those of the SNP-led council. He said: "I don't think it chimes with the spirit of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act to hold against someone a 15-year-old conviction. "Particularly when I've already had to go through a vetting process, a very stiff vetting process from the body that was set up to regulate social care." Sheridan maintains that his "lived experience", including time in prison, makes him particularly suited to working in criminal justice youth social work. He said: "I come from a very working-class background, brought up in a housing scheme, having been in and around jails for the best part of 20-odd years. "I have intimate knowledge of the processes, challenges, and what prison is really like." (Image: Newsquest) He also claimed his gender-critical beliefs—such as rejecting self-identification in favour of biological definitions—played a role in the decision: "I think being a socialist is always difficult for some of the SNP councillors, but I think the biggest area would be my gender critical views. "I don't share the SNP's position that someone can declare that they're a man or a woman. I believe in biology, I believe in science, and so does the law now. "It's very unusual that the Supreme Court agrees with me, but there you go. I agree with the Supreme Court. "Now, those are gender critical views that Glasgow City Council SNP group don't agree with. So I've got no doubt in my mind that that's part of the package." Sheridan's case is currently under consideration at the Court of Session, after he received a rejection letter in August 2024. The court heard that Glasgow City Council deemed his past conviction an 'unacceptable level of risk' for a social work role. His lawyer argued the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC)—the body responsible for regulating the profession—had already approved him as a suitable candidate, making the council's position unlawful. In response, the council's legal representative, Paul Reid KC, maintained the decision was within the local authority's rights as an employment matter and therefore not subject to judicial review. Lord Young is expected to deliver a ruling in due course. READ MORE: Tommy Sheridan to pursue legal action against Scottish council Sheridan has announced plans to return to frontline politics, seeking selection as a candidate for the Alba Party in the next Scottish Parliament elections. He added: "Why don't I go back into politics and start using the skills I have to communicate, to advocate, to try and promote independence. "But also to rage against some of the injustices in our world just now, of which there are far too many." Sheridan rose to prominence as an anti-Poll Tax campaigner, later becoming an MSP in 1999 for the Scottish Socialist Party, which he led during its peak years. He was imprisoned in 2011 after being convicted of perjury related to a defamation case against the News of the World. A Glasgow City Council spokesperson said: 'It is untrue to say that Mr Sheridan's views on trans rights had any bearing on this matter whatsoever. "The hiring process is purely operational, and elected members play no role in selecting candidates for this kind of role. "Furthermore, these assertions did not form any part of Mr Sheridan's case in court.'
The National
3 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Tommy Sheridan says he has been 'victimised' by Glasgow City Council
The city's Health and Social Care Partnership told former MSP Sheridan that all future applications for jobs would be rejected due to him serving jail time for perjury. Glasgow City Council has declined to comment as there is an ongoing case over the issue at the Court of Session. Sheridan told BBC Scotland News that his gender critical views on trans rights were a factor in the decision by the council, adding he had "no doubt whatsoever" that he was being blacklisted. He said: "I don't think it chimes with the spirit of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act to hold against someone a 15-year-old conviction. READ MORE: Stirling Labour councillors face no-confidence vote "Particularly when I've already had to go through a vetting process, a very stiff vetting process from the body that was set up to regulate social care." Sheridan (below) went to Scotland's highest civil court after he received a rejection letter in August last year, in a bid to get the decision overturned. The Court of Session heard social work bosses refused to give Sheridan a job because of the 'unacceptable level of risk' his perjury conviction posed to a council. (Image: NQ) In 2011, Sheridan was found to have had lied under oath during a £200,000 defamation action against the News of the World newspaper and was sentenced to three years in jail. He was subsequently declared bankrupt in 2022 after running up debts while trying to prove he had been wrongfully imprisoned. He appealed against his conviction in 2015, and again in 2016. Both applications were refused. Sheridan's political career was derailed when stories appeared in the News of the World alleging he had taken cocaine and cheated on his wife Gail at swingers' parties. READ MORE: Cuts to PIP will plunge families further into poverty, research says He had risen to prominence as a fierce opponent of the poll tax and led the SSP as a serious political force in Scotland, culminating in the passage of his bill to outlaw poindings and warrant sales. But after successfully suing the now-defunct weekly tabloid for defamation, his case was reviewed and he was later found to have lied to court – resulting in a three-year sentence, of which he served one year. Sheridan said: "If I was applying for a job in the PR department that may have been a consideration. "But dealing with people who have got social problems, trying to help people, trying to use your values, your skills, your knowledge, trying to make people's lives better. I don't understand it at all." He said he believed his views on trans issues were a factor. "I think being a socialist is always difficult for some of the SNP councillors, but I think the biggest area would be my gender critical views," he told the Scotcast podcast. "I don't share the SNP's position that someone can declare that they're a man or a woman. I believe in biology, I believe in science, and so does the law now. "Now, those are gender critical views that Glasgow City Council SNP group don't agree with. So I've got no doubt in my mind that that's part of the package." Sheridan previously led the Scottish Socialist Party at Holyrood. They won several seats in 1999 and 2003. Most recently, he was elected to the governing body of the Alba Party and has put his name forward in the hope of being selected as an Alba candidate for the Scottish Parliament. He said his own "lived experience" behind bars made him an ideal candidate for a youth social work job in criminal justice. "I come from a very working class background, brought up in a housing scheme, having been in and around jails for the best part of 20-odd years," he said. "I have intimate knowledge of the processes, challenges and what prison is really like." Sheridan is still awaiting a decision on his action at the Court of Session. His lawyer said the council acted unlawfully in its decision to permanently exclude him from social work jobs. Glasgow City Council's lawyer Paul Reid KC told the court the local authority acted lawfully and were legally entitled to refuse employment. Lord Young said he would issue a verdict in the near future.
Daily Record
4 days ago
- Business
- Daily Record
Court papers reveal Kibble feasibility study on St Mirren-owned site
The documents, put before the Court of Session in Edinburgh, show the children's charity commissioned a feasibility study of the Ferguslie Park site as a potential location for a wellbeing centre. Kibble was considering St Mirren FC-owned land as a possible location for its wellbeing centre, court documents suggest. Papers, put before the Court of Session in Edinburgh, reveal the children's charity commissioned a feasibility study of the Ferguslie Park site as a potential location for its wellbeing centre. It had, the court was told, identified land to the north of the SMiSA stadium as a potential location, as well as sites in Lochwinnoch and Paisley. Architecture firm Stallan-Brand was instructed to carry out the feasibility study in September 2021 – 18 months after Kibble secured a 27.5 per cent stake in St Mirren FC (SMFC). Kibble refused to comment on the feasibility study as part of a detailed inquiry which was submitted by the Paisley Daily Express last week. The documents were put before the Court of Session as part of a defamation case brought by Kibble chief executive Jim Gillespie and Mark MacMillan, Kibble's director of corporate services. The pair – who represent Kibble on the Buddies board – lodged a defamation case against Mr Wardrop who claimed the men had acted dishonestly. He alleged they were using Kibble's position as a shareholder in St Mirren to push through secret plans for the wellbeing centre on land owned by the football club. Last week, Judge Clark ruled the Kibble bosses had no 'secret plan' to build on the land and, further, that they had not lied to 'cover up' their actions. He also found that Mr Gillespie and Mr MacMillan had no plan to buy the shares in SMFC in order to obtain that land. Mr Wardrop was found to have defamed Mr Gillespie and Mr MacMillan on this basis. But their claim for damages was dismissed as Lord Clark said he believed that Mr Wardrop's comments were in the public interest and were honestly held based on the evidence he had at the time – both defences under the Scottish law around defamation damages. Amongst that evidence was a stage one application to the regeneration capital grant fund (RCGF), which sought £2.65million in Scottish Government funding to help pay for the wellbeing centre. An appendix to that application included a map showing the proposed centre would be positioned on St Mirren FC-owned land. Kibble has long maintained the area on the map had been identified in error by a Renfrewshire Council employee, a claim the local authority has repeatedly refuted. Conflicting accounts from Renfrewshire Council officers and staff at Kibble, however, meant Lord Clark did not accept the area had been identified by Kibble as fact. He did, however, state he found it 'concerning' that the stage two application 'contained several falsehoods'. In the judgement issued last week, Lord Clark said: 'It is nonetheless plainly inappropriate that this stage two application contained several falsehoods. 'For that application to state that the sale of land had been agreed and that an application for planning permission would be submitted by December 2022 when the pursuers' evidence was that no such land had been identified, is concerning.' Kibble failed to explain how such false statements came to be included in the application, or any actions to investigate the inaccuracies, when asked by the Paisley Daily Express. Lord Clark said the false statements were not an attempt to gain public money on a false basis, adding: 'This action has not been raised on behalf of Kibble, but charitable funds have been used to facilitate this action. This can also give rise to some degree of concern, but ultimately it is a matter for the board of Kibble to determine how and when to spend funds.' Stuart Munro of Livingstone Brown, solicitor for Mr Gillespie and Mr MacMillan, said: 'My clients required to bring this action after Mr Wardrop wrongly accused them of having a 'secret plan' to build on land owned by St Mirren FC and of lying about it. 'They are extremely pleased the judge, having heard detailed evidence from numerous witnesses, made it clear in his written judgment that there was no such secret plan, thus setting the record straight. 'Furthermore, the judgement underlines that Mr Wardrop's very public allegations were, as my clients have consistently stated, both untrue and defamatory. 'The judge also agreed that Mr Wardrop's untrue and defamatory statements caused serious harm to their reputations. 'Notwithstanding the finding that Mr Wardrop was entitled to publish, the judge made it very clear that, the true facts having now been established, any future repetition of his claims would have serious consequences.' David Nairn, chair of Kibble, said: 'We are extremely pleased that the judgment underlines the facts in this case and vindicates the board's unanimous decision to support Jim and Mark in what was an important action to protect their reputations and that of Kibble.' However, Lord Clark ultimately dismissed the case and granted a 'decree of absolvitor' in favour of the defender, meaning Mr Wardrop was not found liable for any damages. The judge also reserved his decision on expenses, stating a judgement on who should pay for the legal fees involved will be issued at a later date. Mr Wardrop told the Paisley Daily Express: 'Prior to applying to join the SMiSA board, I had conducted detailed investigations as to the whereabouts of the land forming part of Kibble's RCGF applications for a wellbeing centre. 'I had done this, having been met with a wall of silence from the Kibble directors of St Mirren Football Club, Jim Gillespie and Mark McMillan to my repeated requests for information. 'Had they acted with transparency and provided me with a copy of the stage one application that I requested then, in all likelihood, none of the events of the last two years would have transpired.'
