PROSECUTORS and the police are facing a new court battle over the failed Rangers fraud case - as it emerged they have been unable to reach a settlement over taxpayer-funded damages to former finance chief Imran Ahmad.
The former Ibrox executive has already received an apology from Scotland's most senior law officer over wrongful prosecutions linked to club fraud and conspiracy.
But now it has emerged that attempts to mediate in the multi-million pound action over wrongful prosecution brought by Mr Ahmad have failed to reach a mediation with his legal team accusing the Lord Advocate of "egregious" behaviour.
Mr Ahmad is pursuing an amount that could run to £50m, after he was wrongly prosecuted on fraud charges. Court documents state that at present it is a £2m claim.
Mr Ahmad was charged in 2014 along with six other men during an investigation into how Craig Whyte bought the company that ran the Glasgow football three years earlier.
They were subjected to detention and criminal proceedings in relation to fraud allegations in the wake of Craig Whyte's disastrous purchase of Rangers and its subsequent sale before a judge dismissed all charges.
The case comes after ex-Rangers administrators David Whitehouse and Paul Clark of Duff and Phelps, agreed a settlement estimated to be around £24m after an agreement in their malicious prosecution case against the Lord Advocate and the Chief Constable was reached "extra-judicially".
Ewen Campbell QC for Mr Ahmad told the Court of Session: "The context of this is a malicious prosecution of the pursuer, which has not been put to bed for a lengthy period of time. And if I may say so we are we are we are no we've passed all of that. And we're into the stage of litigation now.
"Where there has been such egregious behaviour on the part of the Lord Advocate towards Mr Ahmad, in my submission this court should be very slow to take any step which will prejudice his ability to adequately prepare and present his case.
"Justice to Mr Ahmad should be the prevailing factor."
Gerry Moynihan QC, for the Lord Advocate said more information was needed over the basis of the claim before any "negotiated settlement" could be reached.
He said: "The object should be trying to get the parties to knock heads to get information they acquire and get them to mediation that is sensible sensible.
But Lord Tyre said it was too late for a settlement.
"Time has been spent fruitlessly so far on attempting to get to mediation," he said. " I'm not attempting to apportion any blame for that. That's none of my business. I simply say that time has been spent on it. So I am proceeding on the basis of this will have to be resolved by the court.
"I think the time has come for the court to take to try to attempt to take some control here to expedite this. There has been considerable time but I'm assuming that the time which has been spent has not been wasted."
Mr Ahmad received a renewed apology from the Lord Advocate ahead of his departure from the role.
James Wolffe QC admitted Mr Ahmad and former Rangers chief executive Charles Green (above) "should never have been prosecuted" in connection with the football club takeover.
A statement from the Lord Advocate said: "Between 2015 and 2016, Mr Imran Ahmad and Mr Charles Green were prosecuted in the High Court concerning matters associated with Rangers Football Club.
"They should not have been prosecuted and, as Lord Advocate and head of the system for the prosecution of crime in Scotland, I have apologised unreservedly that they were.
"I made a statement to the Scottish Parliament following the settlement of two related cases, and I said at that time that there had been profound departures from normal practice.
"Lessons have been learned from what happened and the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) has taken steps to prevent a similar situation arising in the future.
"I have given a commitment that there will be a judge-led inquiry into these matters once all relevant legal cases have concluded.
"The actions by Mr Ahmad and Mr Green continue with a view to settlement of their financial claims."
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