Talk about sticking the boot in, 67 players suing through the Scottish PFA for up to 90 days pay for failure to consult them over the transfer of contracts to the new club, with some claiming it amounted to constructive dismissal. http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/...-legal-action-over-rangers-contract-transfer/ As Aluko is suing for breach of contract over the transfer to the newco he has to be admitting there was a contract to be breached (so not a free agent) and that they tried to transfer it before he rejected the transfer and joined us, so he falls under the following: Who ever loses with the SFA will inevitably appeal to the courts.
i'd assume he's disputing there being a right to transfer his contract to the newco by default, so admitting there was a contract isn't the issue.
It is for one poster on here who insists there was no contract to transfer in the first place. I also seem to have "accidentally" highlighted the bit about their case being heard next year*, can't imagine how or why that might be. *which is this year, because the article is from December.
This is bollocks Ricardo. Tickler has explained plenty of times! Your lack of knowledge in this area is alarming! [NSFW][/NSFW]
I can't open the link but I think I remember someone posting a link from aluko's Twitter saying he wasn't interested in court cases. Could this be a group litigation brought by the spfa that he's not interested in?
The 67 player case is a group litigation. But the article also states: The source for that is the paperwork Rangers produced ahead of their recent share issue. As part of that they had to disclose the details of all claims being made against them.
