Update on finance firm's case against Rangers in Court of Session
Lawyers for the 'Gers and Reputation Exchange PLC told judge Lord Sandison that they have reached an agreement in the action 'in principle.'
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 'significant compensation' from the Glasgow club.
The company, known as REPX, believes the 'Gers 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.
On Friday, Rangers' lawyer Timothy Young told Lord Sandison of the latest development in the case.
READ NEXT: Man arrested after woman and four horses die in crash
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 to 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 monetise their fan 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.
READ NEXT: CCTV released of man in football top after Glasgow train incident
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 customised 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 the 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 FC, who had a customised payment card created to their specifications.'
READ NEXT: Glasgow firms named and shamed for 'deliberate' unpaid tax
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 significant 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 hypothesise 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 implemented because you have got 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.'
'I can assure you that in sort of situation the court rapidly expedites the disposal of such actions.'
READ NEXT: Man dies on Scottish beach in Saltcoats after 'taking unwell'
Lord Sandison also said that if the matter is settled today, then the dates allocated by the court to the two sides could have been allocated to another party who is taking legal action.
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?'
The proof is scheduled to be heard at the Court of Session between July 8 and July 11 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
STV News
17 minutes ago
- STV News
SFA gives detailed response to 'misleading' Rangers disciplinary complaint
The Scottish FA has responded to Rangers' complaint about their disciplinary process, saying the Ibrox club made misleading comments about their judicial system. Rangers went public with their anger over a £3,000 fine levied by an independent panel over comments made on club TV by former player John Brown. While commentating on a match against Hibs at Easter Road, Brown claimed a controversial decision not to award Rangers a goal was 'corrupt' and doubled down on his statement after his colleague corrected his language. Following the decision, which punished the club under a rule that prevents allegations of 'bias or incompetence' being directed at match officials, Rangers issued a lengthy statement claiming that similar incidents at other clubs have gone unpunished, and that the decision has 'implications for clarity and confidence in the regulatory system'. The club said that Brown has spoken 'spontaneously and emotionally' and that his comments 'come with the territory' of live broadcasting. The Scottish FA has now responded, saying that the written reasons from the independent disciplinary panel will be published in due course, but taking issue with the points made by Rangers. The governing body said that they had to address 'misleading comment' in the interest of accuracy and said that the decision and punishment were in accordance by the rules that all member clubs are expected to adhere to. A recent case involving Motherwell's Richard Foster was highlighted, with Foster having been banned from the touchline for six games after making similar comments last season. The SFA also answered a query about the 'rationale behind different outcomes', saying that the organisation's compliance officer can take action short of a full disciplinary charge. Recent incidents involving three Rangers players were given as an example. The statement read: 'Furthermore, to address the comments regarding 'rationale behind differing outcomes', we wish to point to the fact that investigations were undertaken in previous cases outlined and that the Compliance Officers of the time saw fit to issue a censure by way of warning letter for potential breaches deemed insufficiently serious to be progressed to a Notice of Complaint. 'This system of proportionality has been adopted since the inception of the Judicial Panel Protocol in 2011. Indeed, such discretion was exercised last season when the Compliance Officer wrote to the club to warn of the future conduct of players following matters involving Vaclav Cerny, Dujon Sterling and Mohamed Diomande. 'We also note that Rangers intend to contact the association to seek clarity on the Judicial Panel Protocol and its application. The club is, in fact, already represented on the JPP Working Group.' The statement concluded by reminding all clubs of their responsibilities in regard to referees, pointing out that the rule that Brown broke with his comments was brought in by clubs to protect referees following their strike in 2010. 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
BBC News
21 minutes ago
- BBC News
Man jailed for throwing bottle at Celtic keeper in Old Firm game
A man who threw a Buckfast bottle at Celtic's goalkeeper during an Old Firm game has been jailed for eight Watt, 34, launched the missile at Finnish international Viljami Sinisalo from a Rangers supporters section of Ibrox Stadium during the derby match on 4 Sheriff Court heard Watt initially threw a cigarette at Sinisalo after Celtic scored an equaliser against Rangers before then picking up the bottle and hurling it at the keeper as he celebrated the goal. The bottle was handed to police officers by a Rangers player and Watt, of Rutherglen, South Lanarkshire, was later identified on CCTV due to his "distinctive white teeth". Watt pleaded guilty to assaulting Sinisalo and Sheriff Mark McGuire said his actions were not of a "fan" but a "vicious drunken hooligan."The sheriff added: "Your motive was victim blaming."You came to throw a bottle after he celebrated his team scoring an equaliser. That is his job - you victim was doing his job - the man was at his work."In what possible world could you or anyone else think it is acceptable to throw a bottle at someone at his work?"Had the bottle hit him, the consequences could have been catastrophic, career-ending or worse."Sheriff McGuire told Watt that in the "febrile atmosphere" of the Old Firm game his actions could have sparked a was banned from all football matches for a period of six-and-a-half hearing was told that Watt had 21 previous convictions which include two football-related matters from 2013 and 2015, the latter of which saw him jailed for 10 months along with a three-year football ban. Drinking during the match The court heard that after Celtic striker Adam Idah scored in the game, there was a Video Assistant Referee (VAR) check on the goal to see if it would be allowed to a two to three minute stoppage, the referee awarded the equalising goal to Leo McGinn said: "At that point, Mr Sinisalo turned back to his own goal towards the Rangers fans and pumped his fists."This sparked an angry reaction from the Rangers fans behind the goal and a half bottle of Buckfast was thrown in his direction."The bottle did not strike him but landed on the field of play."The bottle was handed over to police officers by a Rangers substitute but the perpetrator was unknown at the time.A CCTV investigation was carried out by police the next day which identified Watt as being McGinn added: "He was seen to throw a lit cigarette in Mr Sinisalo's direction which had not been spotted by officers."Watt could be identified by his build and distinctive white teeth."Kevin Corr, defending Watt, said: "My client had been consuming alcohol on the morning off the game and continued drinking during the match."It was not a full half bottle of Buckfast as it was in the second half of the match."He knows that this is the behaviour of someone in their teens rather than someone in his mid-30s. There is no attempt to minimise or justify what happened."
Scottish Sun
28 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
SFA hit back at Rangers over John Brown ‘corrupt' row and ‘remind clubs of their responsibilities'
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE Scottish FA have hit back in their row with Rangers over the controversy surrounding John Brown's comments made in a match against Hibs last season. Rangers released a strongly worded statement on Thursday after the club were handed a £3,000 fine by Scottish Football's governing body after being found in breach of the rules. Sign up for the Rangers newsletter Sign up 1 16/07/16 Motherwell v Rangers. Pix by Keith Campbell. John Brown Credit: Keith Campbell - The Sun Glasgow This was after the former Gers defender branded Scottish football 'corrupt' live on the club's TV channel when a goal by Nicolas Raskin was chalked off at Easter Road. Rangers were furious and raised concerns about "clarity" and "confidence" in the system. In response the Scottish FA said in a statement: "We note Rangers' response to the determination of a recent independent Judicial Panel Tribunal. "In the interests of accuracy, we wish to address some of the misleading comments contained therein: "The sanction imposed by an independent panel was entirely in keeping with the application of the rules. "The most recent and relevant example of a similar breach, the sanction imposed on Richard Foster of Motherwell FC for comments of a similar nature in the media, attests to that. "Furthermore, to address the comments regarding 'rationale behind differing outcomes', we wish to point to the fact that investigations were undertaken in previous cases outlined and that the Compliance Officers of the time saw fit to issue a censure by way of warning letter for potential breaches deemed insufficiently serious to be progressed to a Notice of Complaint. "This system of proportionality has been adopted since the inception of the Judicial Panel Protocol in 2011. "Indeed, such discretion was exercised last season when the Compliance Officer wrote to the club to warn of the future conduct of players following matters involving Vaclav Cerny, Dujon Sterling and Mohamed Diomande. "We also note that Rangers intend to contact the association to seek clarity on the Judicial Panel Protocol and its application. "The club is, in fact, already represented on the JPP Working Group. "We have requested written reasons from the panel chair involved in the tribunal and in the interests of transparency will publish in due course. "JPP Rule 38 was introduced in response to the referee strike of 2010, when match officials campaigned for greater protection after enduring sustained personal criticism from clubs and fans. Ahead of a new season, we remind clubs of their responsibilities in this regard." More to follow....
