Rangers received £30 million under Whyte

A JUDGE today declined to give Rangers’ administrators legal guidance on their bid to breach a £24.4million season ticket deal.

Rangers’ administrators and Ticketus have both welcomed a ruling on the status of their contract following a court case that revealed the Ibrox club received two payments totalling more than £30 million during Craig Whyte’s stewardship.

A judge at the Court of Session in Edinburgh yesterday would not give directions on the administrators’ request to tear up the contract because Duff & Phelps held back information on bids so as not to undermine the process. Administrators welcomed indications they would have the right to refuse to honour the deal if it was in the best interest of creditors.

But Ticketus questioned whether that scenario could arise, given the “strength” of the bid by the Blue Knights consortium, for which they are providing initial financial backing.

The judge’s written ruling clarified the exact nature of the deals between Ticketus and Rangers chairman Whyte.

Documents showed Whyte received more than £20m plus VAT in May last year, for season tickets over three years. Rangers then sold tickets from another season – 2014-15 – receiving more than £5m on or about 21 September. With VAT added, the total payments Rangers received under Whyte were £30.5m.

Having sold season books for the current campaign, Ticketus owns the rights to tickets worth £27m over the next three years, the company has confirmed.

The administrators, Duff & Phelps, went to the Court of Session in Edinburgh last week to seek legal directions on whether it could be prevented from “causing Rangers to terminate, albeit in breach of their terms, the Ticketus agreements”.

The investment firm’s cash injection allowed Whyte, who is also the majority shareholder, to pay off the club’s bank debt and complete his takeover last May.

The administrators argued that the deal could put off potential investors and they sought a court decision on the status of the agreement, but Lord Hodge said he had “declined to give a direction” because “he considered that the court had not been given sufficient information to allow it to make such a ruling”.

Duff & Phelps and Ticketus responded with differing interpretations of Lord Hodge’s ruling.

The administrators said it was “clear” they had “the statutory right and powers” to have the club “refuse to honour the Ticketus arrangements if such a decision would be in the interests of creditors generally”.

But Ticketus claimed it was “clear” its contract “cannot be breached unless there is substantial evidence that by doing so the administrators are able to significantly improve returns for creditors and improve the chance of returning the club to a going concern”.