Celtic Park

Next Game

Celtic v Rangers

Sunday, 01 February 2015, 13:30

Scot League Cup Semi-Final

Last Game

Alloa 0 - 1 Rangers

Saturday, 10 January 2015, 15:00

Scots Champ

Whyte's 'false' Ticketus claim

A judge has ruled that former Rangers owner Craig Whyte gave "false" information to Ticketus regarding his director disqualification.

Last Updated: 15/04/13 at 19:56 Post Comment

Craig Whyte: Former Rangers owner gave 'false' information to Ticketus,

Craig Whyte: Former Rangers owner gave 'false' information to Ticketus,

More of the games that matter

Upgrade in minutes or watch with a NOW TV Day Pass.

A 28-page judgement delivered at the Chancery Division of the High Court in London earlier this month, seen by Sky Sports News, found that Whyte had failed to disclose the ban to the firm.

Master Marsh awarded Ticketus £17,683,338 in damages on 5 April 2013.

Whyte has told Sky Sports News that the judgement "is being appealed" and declined to comment further on the ruling.

The court heard, by 28 February 2011, and prior to the Rangers takeover, Mr Whyte had not completed a Directors' Questionnaire, or at least had not returned it, to Ross Bryan, an investment manager with Octopus Investment Limited, an FSA regulated fund management company responsible for sourcing, organising and managing investment opportunities on behalf of Ticketus.

Mr Bryan held discussions with Mr Whyte over season tickets between 2011/12 and 2014/15.

At 11.21 on 28 February 2011, Mr Bryan sent an email to Mr Whyte: "Craig - I don't have your director's questionnaire. Much of it would be n/a I imagine, but most relevant are: (a) Have you ever been disqualified as a director (b) Has a company you were involved with been investigated or inspected by the LSC, FSA or other financial regulatory body."

The court heard that at 15.03 the same day Mr Whyte replied to Mr Bryan: "I have attached the directors questionnaire. I'm not near a scanner right now so it's unsigned. Let me know if you need anything else."

The court heard how answers to two questions in the Director's Questionnaire were key to the case involving Ticketus.

Question 6.3 asked: "Have you at any time, in connection with the formation or management of a company, partnership or unincorporated association or business in the United Kingdom, or elsewhere, being accused of any fraud, deception, misfeasance, breach of trust or other misconduct of impropriety towards such a body or towards any members of such a body?

Question 6.6 asked: "Have you at any time been disqualified from working as director (or being involved in the management) of a company?"

The answer "No" appeared against each question but Mr Whyte admitted in the course of the proceedings that in, or about, 1998 claims had been brought against Mr Whyte by the liquidator of a company named Vital UK Limited for misfeasance, breach of duty and negligence, which claims were apparently subsequently settled for £150,000.

Mr Whyte also admitted that in, or about, 1998, disqualification proceedings had been brought against Mr Whyte in which Mr Whyte had been accused of the misapplication of the assets of two companies to the detriment of their creditors and have failed to co-operate with the official investigations of the Official Receiver into one of those companies.

Mr Whyte admitted that in, or about, June 2000 he had been disqualified from acting as a director by order of the High Court for a period of seven years.

In his judgement, Master Marsh said: "The inescapable conclusion on the evidence is that Mr Whyte knew his answers to questions 6.3 and 6.6 were false. But, even if I am wrong about that, he was reckless about whether the answers were accurate, and provided them not caring whether they were true. Alternatively, he was negligent in failing to check the accuracy of the questionnaire before passing it on and has failed to discharge the evidential burden on him under section 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act."

Mr Whyte denies having made a false representation, or representations, to Ticketus and told the court that the Director's Questionnaire was prepared by his solicitors and he did not check it before sending it to Mr Bryan. He says this was not surprising as he expected his solicitors to ensure it was accurate.

Mr Whyte claimed the Questionnaire was an unsigned "travelling draft" and as such he paid less attention to it than if it had been a final document. Mr Whyte says Ticketus failed to mitigate their position.

Master Marsh ruled: "There are two points that arise. First, I have concluded that the representations were fraudulent in this case. Secondly, even if that is wrong, it was simply impossible for Ticketus to check the accuracy of the answer to questions 6.3 and 6.6 in the Director's Questionnaire."

Master Marsh, who made the judgement, is a former partner of Collyer Bristow, the law firm who previously acted for Mr Whyte at the time of the Rangers takeover.

Marsh resigned from Collyer Bristow in February 2012 before his appointment as a Master of the High Court Chancery Division from 12 March 2012.

There is no suggestion that Marsh has been directly involved with Whyte and a spokeswoman for the judiciary said: "Master Marsh was a member of Collyer Bristow LLP until 28 February 2012, before he took up his post as Chancery Master. He was aware of a claim against Collyer Bristow and therefore raised his previous connection with Collyer Bristow LLP with the parties at the outset in case in case they felt he should recuse himself. All the parties, including Mr Whyte, were content for the judge to deal with the case. Master Marsh's former connection with Collyer Bristow LLP has no bearing on the case."

TEAMtalk Facebook Fan Page

The TEAMtalk fan page is a great place to meet like minded people, have football related discussions and make new friends.

Related News

Most Commented

Readers' Comments

S

o Brendan is full of sh!t, who'd have thought it eh?

fatbob30
Carroll accuses Rodgers

P

resumably, you wanted to keep the version of Downing that was never seen at Anfield. The one that another manager has managed to re-create. The one you passed over.

badwolf
Rodgers: I wanted to keep Downing

T

he uber commercialisation of the 90s has led to the point where this overly familar, try hard, jolly hockey sticks type fronts up a major football match on a weekly basis. Unlike the great presenters of yesteryear, I doubt he would even recognise the scent of Brut.

mufc phil
Football On TV: Jake Humphrey

Footer 365

Nemanja Matic says Chelsea happy to maintain their five-point Premier League lead

Midfielder Nemanja Matic was happy to take a point after Chelsea's 1-1 draw with Manchester City.

Roberto Martinez delighted with 'immense' Everton's 1-0 win at Crystal Palace

Roberto Martinez believes his side can now reach their true potential after ending their winless run at Crystal Palace.

Premier League: Chelsea maintain five-point lead after 1-1 draw with Manchester City

Chelsea remain five points clear at the top of the Premier League after a 1-1 draw with second-placed Manchester City.

Mail Box

'Costa Is A Bad Man. Suarez Is Not'

That's quite some claim. And yes, unfortunately we are still talking about this. We also have mails on Ronaldinho, possible replacements for Yaya Toure and more...

Red Mist Better Than Calculated Costa?

Hmmm. We're not sure about this argument - one Mailbox says Luis Suarez is easier to forgive because he is a little loco. We also have mails on Studge and more...

© 2015 Sky Ltd. All Rights Reserved A Sky Sports Digital Media company