BILLIONAIRE Mike Ashley will have to pay around £20,000 to Scottish football's ruling body for his failed attempt to reverse their decision to fine him for breaching dual ownership rules.
The Sports Direct owner, who has a near nine percent shareholding in Rangers and owns Newcastle United has been ordered by Lord Brodie to pay half of the Scottish Football Association's costs.
Ashley, the world's 318th richest man, failed to overturn a fine at a judicial review in June.
Lord Brodie said the exact circumstances of the case meant that Mr Ashley should not have to pay all of the costs incurred in the case.
The judge also ruled that Mr Ashley should have to pay an additional fee to SFA to meet the cost of specialist legal advice which they had to take from a solicitor who specialised in sports law.
Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley went for a judicial review after having a fine imposed by Scottish football's governing body for breaching so-called dual ownership rules involving Rangers cut from £7,500 to £1,000.
He claimed errors in law had been made and sought to have the breaches and fine scrapped.
The court of session judgment said his Mash company entered into a credit facility arrangement of £2m with the owner of Rangers FC, Rangers Football Club Ltd (RFCL), on 26 October 2014. Conditions of the loan stipulated that Mash could appoint up to two directors on the board of RFCL.
Days later, Llambias was appointed as a director of RFCL and its sole shareholder, Rangers International Football Club plc.
Ashley’s lawyer, Craig Sandison QC, argued that Mash – not Ashley – entered into the credit facility agreement, but SFA lawyers disagreed.
In a written judgment, Philip Brodie said the SFA disciplinary tribunal was “entitled to find that the petitioner [Ashley] had acted ‘through’ his associate, Mash”.
Lord Brodie also agreed with the SFA that the “very granting of the right to nominate directors in and of itself gave rise to the possibility of the petitioner influencing the affairs of two clubs”.
In June, last year, appeal tribunal took the decision took a decision to reduce his fine despite agreeing that he had deliberately sought a degree of control at Rangers.
An SFA judicial panel had deemed Mr Ashley had influence in the Ibrox boardroom.
Mr Ashley had been deemed to have influenced the management or administration through the appointment of business associates Derek Llambias and Barry Leach to the club's board. He also offered a credit facility to the club in October, 2014.
The judicial panel previously heard that Ashley made cash loans to the cash-strapped Scottish Championship club, held commercial contracts and had Mr Llambias and Mr Leach operating as chief executive and finance director, respectively, on the Ibrox board until they were removed at an extraordinary general meeting called by Dave King.
The grounds of the appeal said that it was clearly established that Ashley's MASH Holdings Ltd company entered into a credit agreement with Rangers, and not its owner Mr Ashley, with the result that the judicial panel finding was "inconsistent".
Mr Ashley argued there was "no direct evidence" that either he or MASH Holdings Ltd nominated Derek Llambias as a director and a "full and fair reading of all witness statements provided no basis for such an inference".
The appeal tribunal, in rejecting an appeal that Mr Ashley had breached dual ownership rules, agreed the club's granting of a right to for the Newcastle United owner to nominate directors gave rise to the possibility of him influencing the affairs of two clubs.
But they agreed to cut the fine, agreeing that the Judicial Panel "failed to specify clearly the mitigating and aggravating factors on which they relied" to impose their sanction.
In December, 2014, the SFA refused to allow Sports Direct owner Mr Ashley to increase his stake in Rangers International Football Club to 29.9 per cent. He had previously signed an agreement that limited his shareholding to 10 per cent.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel