The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Leopard reappears, spots identical

Posted on June 14, 2012 by

We’ve been having a little poke around in the insolvency laws today, and we have to inform Wings Over Scotland readers with shame and regret that we made a mistake in our Rangers Liquidation FAQ a couple of days ago. It turns out that it is in fact permissible for a new company to take over the name of an old one, so long as the old company was purchased in the process of liquidation, an exemption which would seem to clearly apply in the case of Rangers.

In the light of bizarre and intriguing recent developments, then, we’re faced with an interesting prospect: a new Rangers FC, playing next season under the old name, in the old colours, with the old history, in the SPL, at Ibrox Stadium, led by Walter Smith, with the current playing squad, completely free of debt and with a £20m bank balance from season ticket sales. (After paying back the bargain-basement purchase price.)

One can only imagine the tone of triumph from the Govan club’s friendly supporters.

The Big Tax Case would be irrelevant, buried with the oldco, as would the SFA investigation into dual contracts and the punishment for bringing the game into disrepute. Tens of millions of pounds owed to the taxpayer would simply disappear in a puff of smoke, as would the millions owed to other football clubs, to Ticketus, and to hundreds of smaller creditors for whom the money could (and now will) be the difference between their business surviving and dying.

The new Rangers wouldn’t be eligible to play in European competitions for three years, but business would otherwise carry on exactly as it did last season without interruption. It doesn’t seem much of a punishment for 10 to 20 years of deliberate, blatant, industrial-scale cheating, robbing other clubs of tens of millions of pounds and driving the Scottish game to the brink of destruction in the process, does it?

The above is, of course, a best/worst-case scenario according to which side of the debate you’re on. Even if the new Rangers could secure an 8-4 Yes vote to their entry into the SPL, the SFA could apply conditions and sanctions, as could the other clubs in return for their vote. But the new Rangers could always renege on any promises it made (eg in respect of agreeing to a change in SPL voting rules or sharing TV money), and it could challenge any SFA conditions in the civil-law courts, were the SFA to be so toothless as to let them get away with doing it previously.

The press is reporting that the attitudes of several of the the other clubs in the top division is hardening against the notion of admitting the phoenix Rangers directly to the SPL. In the circumstances we can’t say we’re surprised.

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 17 06 12 05:48

    So what did you learn at school this week? – Scottish Roundup

19 to “Leopard reappears, spots identical”

  1. TheMaganator says:

    Are you sure, Wings? s216 seems pretty clear:

    216.— Restriction on re-use of company names.

    (1) This section applies to a person where a company (“the liquidating company”) has gone into insolvent liquidation on or after the appointed day and he was a director or shadow director of the company at any time in the period of 12 months ending with the day before it went into liquidation.

    (2) For the purposes of this section, a name is a prohibited name in relation to such a person if—

    (a) it is a name by which the liquidating company was known at any time in that period of 12 months, or

    (b) it is a name which is so similar to a name falling within paragraph (a) as to suggest an association with that company.

    The link to the ‘business’ site refers to the London Gazette – are you sure sure the information there is compatible with Scots Law?

    Reply
  2. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    That was my initial interpretation too, but S216 only applies to directors of the new company who were also directors of the old company, and in any event prohibited names are subject to the exemptions linked in the article.

    Good point about Scots law, though – need to check if it’s different to English re: insolvency, though I thought all UK companies were registered at Companies House and subject to the same rules. STAND BY.

    Reply
  3. Kenny Campbell says:

    The artist formerly known as Prince is now The Prince ?
     
    link to heraldscotland.com
     

    Reply
  4. Confucious says:

    I don’t thing your statement that “Tens of millions of pounds owed to the taxpayer would simply disappear in a puff of smoke” is quite accurate. The reason that HMRC refused the CVA was to better enable them to pursue the individuals who benefited from the EBT. They seem to be taking the view that it was the responsibility of the individuals to ensure that they paid the correct amount of tax. The unpaid tax and fines since White took over will be lost however as that was solely the responsibility of the club / company.

    Reply
  5. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Indeed – the Small Tax Case money would be lost, and the PAYE and NI dodged by Whyte would be lost. I think that’s already over £10m. Bear in mind also that Murray and Whyte are pretty much broke, so even if HMRC could recover more from them than from a CVA it’s still likely to be a very long way short of what they – we – are owed.

    Reply
  6. Arbroath1320 says:

    Speaking from a point of absolute naivety and ignorance of all things related to the inner operations of Scottish football, can I just say that I believe the SFA have already made a rod for their own back.
     
    If my mind serves me right, and I admit it may not here, is the current Rangers situation not similar to that of Livingston and Gretna in the past. At least in terms of going into administration/liquidation. If so then these two clubs were unceremoniously kicked out of the SPL and down into the SFL Division 3.
     
    My blinkered point is this. If demotion to Division 3 is good enough for Livingston and Gretna then why is it not good enough for Rangers?
    Surely, any option other than demotion to Division 3 is tantamount to showing favouritism towards Rangers, something I am sure the rest of Scottish football would not take too kindly to. Immaterial of what the end result is with regards to players, grounds etc surely if the SFA want to show any sort of consistency then they have only one option, namely demotion to division 3.
     
    By following the precedence of previous decisions the SFA will, in my view, sort out the wheat from the chaff, in terms of Rangers supporters. I mean by this that only the die hard Rangers supporter will follow Rangers to Division 3, the “sunny day” type of supporter will disappear until Rangers returns to the SPL.

    Reply
  7. TheMaganator says:

    Yes, right enough – it seems that if the director bought RFC after the date of liquidation he’d be free to bash on?

    All very confusing… 

    Reply
  8. Kenny Campbell says:

    Gretna were relegated as they could not guarantee their remaining fixtures, Livingston as it was the second time they went bust. So the same but different.

    Reply
  9. Arbroath1320 says:

    The latest as per BBC is that Green has bought Rangers.
     
    link to bbc.co.uk
     
    It is claimed that he bought the club under a previously agreed binding deal. I assume this is the binding deal with Duff and Phelps. However, as H.M.R.C have their own accountancy firm looking into Rangers as a result of H.M.R.C. refusing the C.V.A. would they not take precedent over Duff and Phelps, particularly as I read, I think it was here, that Duff and Phelps would themselves be part of the H.M.R.C.’s accountants investigation.
     
    Could we yet see  this “rushed”, in my view, announcement of Green buying Rangers being overturned?
     
    I don’t believe that this announcement by Green is a done deal. I have a feeling there are more than a few twists and turns yet to appear, not least as a result of a) the C.V.A. being formally rejected this morning and b) the appearance of Walter Smith on the scene with more money would, I think seem to be a very attractive offer at least to the H.M.R.C. accountants.

    Reply
  10. Kenny Campbell says:

    I’m enjoying a 10 minute period of watching the anti Rangers brigade hand wringing instead of the Pro Rangers Battalion 🙂

    Reply
  11. TheMaganator says:

    @Kenny Campbell
    I am not anti-Rangers. I am pro-Hearts. I want our money for Lee Wallace. I take no pleasure in seeing any legitimate football (ie non-bigoted numpty) fan losing their club.
    It is your board I take issue with – not your fans.

    Reply
  12. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “I’m enjoying a 10 minute period of watching the anti Rangers brigade hand wringing instead of the Pro Rangers Battalion :)

    Hey, I’m just making sure nobody gets overconfident, eases off the pressure and lets their club vote New Rangers back in…

    😀

    Reply
  13. Randomscot says:

    I used to think the Rangers-Celtic stuff was bad until I saw the seething contempt Jambos have for Hibees, especially in the Wallace Mercer days.

    It’s SPL attitudes like that that made me the Petershill fan I am today

    Reply
  14. TheMaganator says:

    @Randomscot

    I am not sure that is true. Most Hearts fans I know see Hibs as being ‘the funny wee neighbour’ type – to be mocked and ridiculed. There is not the element of hatred that there is with the OF.

    I have only been watching Hearts for 25 or so years though so cannot really comment on the 70s/early 80s and before. 

    Reply
  15. Randomscot says:

    @ Themagnator

    I’m basing it on working in Edinburgh from 87 to 95, amongst Jambos and Hibees and weird displaced Old Firm fans of the east.

    The Old Firm had the visceral rage and hate, but there was a cold contempt from Jambos to Hibees, it was weird, not as weird as when they were talking about buying out the Hibs.

    It led me to think “this supporting a big club is madness, isn’t it, so, Springburn for me!” 

    Reply
  16. Kenny Campbell says:

    There was a tweet from Spiers today saying that some very strong rumours that HMRC have cut some deal, even if not true its put a few Celtic fans off their Jelly by all accounts.

    Reply
  17. John Lyons says:

    hmmmm….

    There are some other questions I’d like to ask.

    How did Craig Whyte ever expect to make money out of buying Rangers? I’ve never been able to get my head around that…
    How does Charles Green expect to make money out of buying Rangers? Same reasoning applies, no-one buys football clubs to make money do they?

    If the SPL clubs vote Rangers out, will Green walk away? Because he’s always said his deal is conditional to Rangers being in the SPL. If he’s rushed himself to Owner status because of the threat of Smiths bid will he live to regret it?

    If the SPL clubs vote Rangers out, and Green does walk away, will Smith still be intersted? He’s true blue, but is he true third division?

    Interesting times.

    Personally, I want Justice. My biggest fear here is that other clubs lose out on money owed to them by Rangers and are pushed dangerously close to closing down themselves. It would then only take one other club (I suspect Hearts Cause Mad Vlad is crazy enough to do it!) to see Rangers get through administration and liquidation virtually unscathed and to follow suit and if Hearts owe these same clubs similar amounts of money we’ll see clubs fold. Rangers need to be punished for thier crimes, not only because it is right that wrongdoers are punished, but also to deter others from copying.

    I feel some pity for Rangers fans, but not a lot. When you are down and need the help of other clubs to survive, you should not get money together and then refuse to give it to Dundee Utd. I think there’s a very real chance Utd will vote against Rangers being in the SPL, and if that’s the vote that sends them to the third Division I think the Rangers fans deserve it, not because of the actions of David Murray or Craig Whyte who have very nearly destroyed thier club, but because of thier own pettiness.

    Reply
  18. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “There was a tweet from Spiers today saying that some very strong rumours that HMRC have cut some deal, even if not true its put a few Celtic fans off their Jelly by all accounts.”

    Eh? Who would HMRC be cutting a deal with? They have no lawful interest in New Rangers or Charles Green – all of Old Rangers debts die with the oldco.

    Reply
  19. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “How does Charles Green expect to make money out of buying Rangers?”

    I’m just about to do a wee blog on that.

    Reply


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)

    Stats: 6,762 Posts, 1,218,647 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • robertkknight on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I guess Scotland should never aspire to be a normal, independent, sovereign state, like the 200 or so others on…May 28, 09:03
    • Sven on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Dan @ 08.08 Always interested in your common sense posts, Dan. As someone once said, “it’s strange it’s called common…May 28, 08:27
    • Hatey McHateface on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: ““the inescapable conclusion ….in the words of Mr Baird – Independence IS Decolonisation” Hey, I’m not knocking the idea, Bob,…May 28, 08:11
    • Dan on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “See if your country was caught in an ongoing unmitigated disaster with aw thing like its infrastructure and services going…May 28, 08:08
    • Robert Hughes on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “From Robin McAlpine’s latest ( typically incisive ) post talking about the outrageous but entirely predictable green light given to…May 28, 07:18
    • Willie on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “The SNP are not for turning. Certainly not underthe current coterie of control that continues to show them as an…May 28, 03:11
    • Jim Dryburgh on The Undertaker: “whether it’s 75% or whatever with each year the amount of indigenous Scots v Non Indigenous Scots is becoming less…May 28, 01:31
    • duncanio on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Sarah – Yes there is time for them all to change their minds. And we must keep trying to persuade…May 27, 22:57
    • sarah on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “@ duncanio at 8.56 re ISP and the M4I. I’m perplexed. However there is time for ISP to change their…May 27, 22:03
    • duncanio on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Sarah – I’m afraid Collette Walker was quite explicit in her email to me about the ISP developing their own…May 27, 20:56
    • Hatey McHateface on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Sorry Alf. Common sense tells me that even if you accept the existence of the Coloniser (with one set of…May 27, 20:00
    • Hatey McHateface on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Be honest now, Marie. Wouldn’t you be better for shedding a few pounds? If you don’t want to entertain any…May 27, 19:39
    • sarah on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I am really surprised at that response from ISP. I’ve read and thought over the MforI and cannot see anything…May 27, 19:26
    • duncanio on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “twathater I have supported SSRG, Salvo and Liberation since inception, having attended the Edinburgh Proclamation gathering on 1st September 2022…May 27, 19:13
    • Alf Baird on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “We cannot treat “the colonial question…as a subsidiary part of some more important global matter” (Robin D. G. Kelley). And…May 27, 18:47
    • twathater on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I agree with you Sarah regarding Roddy and Peter Bell, duncanio criticises Liberate for having no publicly clear immediate route…May 27, 18:25
    • Marie on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Correct BP.May 27, 18:22
    • Dave G on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I’m glad you even manage to see a “Brit” identity. It is now routine to walk down High Street or…May 27, 18:18
    • Aidan on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Yes, that was the motivation behind the blue sea rule. The legal principles on decolonisation and NSGT’s were agreed by…May 27, 17:42
    • duncanio on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Sarah – We don’t have the luxury of time. Every time there is an election it could be the last…May 27, 17:33
    • Xaracen on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “But, Aidan, how can the ‘blue water’ requirement be “fundamental” when you made it clear to me that its purpose…May 27, 17:04
    • James Cheyne on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I have been squinting quickly through, Textual Amendments to “Scotland union with England” Acts House of Lords ( privileges Committee…May 27, 16:43
    • Northcode on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Hello, Sam. Good to know you’re still about this place. “We are much the same genetic material now as in…May 27, 16:21
    • sarah on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “That is indeed interesting about the party whip system. I’d love to see their candidate win.May 27, 16:14
    • sarah on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “@ duncanio at 11.23 p.m. and twathater at 03.33. Thank you, twathater for correctly pointing out my motivation for supporting…May 27, 16:12
    • Northcode on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: ““Towards decolonization and then liberation.” Indeed, Alf. The third and final phase of Scotland’s decolonization has begun there’s no doubt…May 27, 16:04
    • Kelpie on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I live in Hamilton so we have people canvassing and leaf-letting for the by-election next week. I’ve never had so…May 27, 16:01
    • sarah on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “I enjoyed reading this, Robert. Brought a smile, much needed.May 27, 15:51
    • James Barr Gardner on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Wallonia has the right of veto in Belgian Federal decisions, it’s population of 3.7 million is 31.4% of Belgium……..May 27, 15:32
    • Breastplate on What Are We, And Where Are We Going?: “Yes, John, you’re correct, it is something you eat, particularly in Scotland. What the English call rolls, tend to be…May 27, 14:25
  • A tall tale



↑ Top