THE GLOBAL company responsible for running Rangers when it financially imploded are claiming misconduct in public office while pursuing a £25m claim against Scotland's most senior law officer over damage to their business over the malicious club fraud case scandal.

But the Lord Advocate is questioning the relevancy of the action by Duff and Phelps which comes after it was admitted their employees David Whitehouse and Paul Clark were maliciously prosecuted in their action taken against prosecutors and the police.

Both settled out of court in December and the Crown Office confirmed both men were awarded £10.5m damages, while legal costs will be at least £3m.

The new case means that the taxpayer faces a bill of over £110m for the wrongful prosecutions by the Crown Office and Police Scotland.

Mr Whitehouse, Mr Clark and five others were subjected to detention and criminal proceedings in relation to fraud allegations in the wake of Craig Whyte's disastrous purchase of Rangers from Sir David Murray for £1 in May 2011 and its subsequent sale before a judge dismissed all charges.

The Herald:

The fraud case arose after the club under Mr Whyte went into administration nine months after he bought it, with debts soaring over £100m while the team ended up relegated to the bottom rung of the Scottish football pyramid.

Roddy Dunlop QC for Duff and Phelps said: "Plainly, the basis for this case is not malicious prosecution, Duff and Phelps weren't prosecuted.

"But what we see is, misconduct in public office."

Mr Dunlop referred to a Roman law in which "if you throw a spear at A and hit B you are still liable."

"And when we say that simple reasoning applies equally here, is that genuinely resisisted, and if so on what basis, because unless there is a coherent basis for resisting, we suggest this is an appropriate case for summary decree at least," he said.

READ MORE: Rangers malicious fraud case scandal sees taxpayer face over £110m bill

A summary decree is an order which the court can grant if a party successfully persuades the court that there is no real defence to an action even though a defence has been presented.

Gerry Moynihan QC for the Lord Advocate indicated to Lord Tyre that he would be seeking dismissal of the case and that there were serious questions over quantifying the damages alleged to have been inflicted.

He said: "There is a legal argument to be had about whether the grounds of liability for malicious prosecution, are the same as those for misfeasance."

He added: "I can indicate to your Lordship that malice at the petition stage is disputed the relevancy of the pleadings in that regard, will be disputed. Causation, the absence of averment of sufficient causation is disputed.

"And the total consequence of quantification... is a basis upon which I will be seeking dismissal of the action full stop."

Five of the seven men charged in relation to Rangers fraud cases have been pursuing compensation complaints over wrongful arrest against either Police Scotland, the Crown Office or both with a collective claim now standing at £113m.

Court of Session judge Lord Tyre has also ruled that David Grier, a Duff and Phelps executive that there was no “probable cause” to prosecute Mr Grier who is also seeking £5m damages from the Lord Advocate and £9m from Police Scotland.