Craig Whyte today began the latest round of a High Court fight with a ticket-buying firm in connection with his ownership of Rangers.
Craig Whyte appealed after being ordered to pay more than £17 million to Ticketus earlier this year.
He asked Deputy High Judge David Halpern QC to overturn the ruling, made by a more junior judge, at a hearing in London.
Ticketus said Mr Whyte had fraudulently or negligently made representations which induced the company to enter into agreements related to the sale or purchase of Rangers' season tickets in 201, and claimed damages.
Mr Whyte disputed the claim.
But in April a High Court master had ruled against Mr Whyte prior to a trial, after Ticketus argued that the former Rangers' boss had "no real prospect" of mounting a successful defence.
The master ordered Mr Whyte to pay £17.6 million.
Lawyers for Mr Whyte today argued that the master's decision to grant a "summary judgment" had been unfair.
They said the case should be allowed to go to trial and said Mr Whyte had a "realistic" defence.
The judge is expected to finishing hearing evidence and legal argument later today.
Judge Halpern was told that the case centred on answers given by Mr Whyte on a questionnaire which featured in a "due diligence process".
The master had said Mr Whyte answered "no" when asked whether he had been disqualified from working as a director.
He said Mr Whyte had been disqualified in 2000.
Ticketus said it relied upon the answer - and said Mr Whyte knew that he had made false representations.
The master said Mr Whyte had said the questionnaire was "prepared by his solicitors" and he had "expected his solicitors to ensure it was accurate".
But he said the "inescapable conclusion" was that Mr Whyte "knew" answers were false - or had been negligent in failing to check.
The hearing ended shortly after 3pm and Judge Halpern said he would deliver a ruling at a later date.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article