FORMER Rangers chief Charles Green is to get a damages award in his £20 million compensation bid against Scotland's most senior law officer and chief constable over the collapsed club fraud case.
The Lord Advocate has admitted liability in damages after he admitted that the prosecution of Mr Green was malicious, had no proper basis and never had "objective probable cause".
Garry Borland QC, representing Charles Green said that the actions against Mr Green "a shameful episode in the history of the prosecution services".
Charles Green, 67, was arrested five years ago for charges connected to the “alleged fraudulent acquisition” of the club in 2012 but the prosecution was later abandoned.
Mr Green and others were subjected to criminal proceedings with others in the wake of Craig Whyte's purchase of Rangers from Sir David Murray for a £1 and its subsequent sale before a judge dismissed the charges.
At the Court of Session, Gerry Moynihan QC, for the Lord Advocate, said that the attempted prosecution of Mr Green was not on a proper basis and it is "admitted that there has never been objective probable cause".
He said: "It is admitted that the prosecution of Mr Green had no proper basis. It is admitted there has never been objective probable cause. And it is admitted that in these circumstances malice, in the sense required to give rise to liability in common law, can be inferred.
"The import of all of that is the Lord Advocate acknowledges that there has been a malicious prosecution in the sense in which that term is used in our law. And accordingly there is liability in damages to Mr Green."
Mr Green has maintained that the wrongful arrest and prosecution ruined his life and it understood he is seeking damages in the region of £20 million.
Mr Borland for Mr Green said: "A public admission that Mr Green has been subject to a malicous prosecution, represents a shameful episode in the history of the prosecution services in Scotland. And Mr Green has suffered a gross injustice as a result of this."
The Lord Advocate has already admitted malicious prosecution of the former administrators of Rangers in connection with the collapsed club fraud case.
In an unprecedented development the Lord Advocate also admitted a breach of human rights in the investigation which has led to the former administrators conducting a multi-million pound damages claim to clear their names.
David Whitehouse and Paul Clark, who were joint administrators at the Ibrox club in 2012 following its takeover by Craig Whyte, have already been awarded a huge interim expenses award of £350,000 and £250,000 respectively by Lord Tyre.
The damages cases come three years after former Rangers owner Craig Whyte, who was the last man standing in the fraud conspiracy case, was acquitted of taking over the club by fraud at the end of a seven-week trial.
Mr Whitehouse, of Cheshire, subsequently brought a damages claim against the Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC and the former chief constable of Police Scotland, Phil Gormley, for £9m. Mr Clark, of Surrey, sued for £5m.
All the actions stem from their alleged treatment by the police and prosecution authorities.
Mr Whitehouse and Mr Clark won a ruling from a specially convened bench of five judges at the Court of Session in Edinburgh last year that the Lord Advocate did not have absolute immunity from a civil damages claim in such circumstances.
Mr Green is suing the Lord Advocate saying the prosecution of him never had any "proper basis" and that it was conducted "without probable cause, in other words it was unjustifiable and should never have been pursued".
He also says that the prosecution was "malicious and therefore wrongful and unlawful".
He is also suing the chief constable for what he says was unlawful detention in connection with the attempted prosecution.
Mr Borland said: "Mr Green seeks substantial damages as a result of the wrongs done to him."
The case has been adjourned.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel