Key Rangers figure David Grier fights judge's dismissal of £14m failed fraud case claim

Mr Grier, 58, from London, who had also demanded a public apology from officials said the arrest had been a "career ending moment".

Court of Session judge Lord Tyre has already ruled there was no “probable cause” to prosecute Mr Grier and a continuing case had tried to establish malice and the amount of damage caused.

But in January, Lord Tyre said that Mr Grier had not made out a case that there was malicious prosecution.

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".

Today Mr Grier launched his appeal against Lord Tyre's ruling in the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

Mr Grier, an insolvency expert also with Duff and Phelps, was charged in 2014 along with a number of other men during an investigation into how Mr Whyte bought the company that ran the Glasgow football club three years earlier.

He said police arrested him at his home in the south of England at 6am and drove him north to Glasgow.

Mr Grier, a key figure in businessman Craig Whyte's purchase of Rangers from Sir David Murray for £1 in May 2011, said that many years after his arrest, he still had no idea why he was prosecuted over his involvement.

Mr Whitehouse, Mr Clark, Mr Grier and four others 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 police investigation was launched against a backdrop of the controversial nature of Mr Whyte's nine-months in charge which ended with the club's business going into administration with debts soaring over £100m while the team ended up relegated to the bottom rung of the Scottish football pyramid.

Mr Whyte had agreed to take on Rangers' financial obligations, which included an £18m bank debt, a potential £72m 'big tax case' bill, a £2.8m "small tax case" liability, £1.7m for stadium repairs, £5m for players and £5m in working capital.

But he controversially helped fund his takeover by setting up a loan in advance from London-based investment firm Ticketus against rights to three to four years of future club season ticket sales in a bid to raise £24 million and pay off bank debt as part of a share purchase agreement with Sir David Murray.

Mr Grier has always said he was unaware that London finance firm Ticketus funded Mr Whyte's controversial purchase of the club by buying up rights to future season tickets.

But officers suspected Mr Grier, of London, had broken the law during the sale of the Ibrox side and the businessman was charged with fraud, conspiracy, a charge under the Proceeds of Crime Act and a charged of attempting to pervert the course of justice - before the case was dropped.

Prosecutors and the police argue that they had a degree of reasonable cause to pursue Mr Grier.

The Chief Constable argued that officers formed a "reasonable belief" that he was implicated in criminal wrongdoing and had assisted in a fraudulent scheme.

In lengthy findings Lord Tyre said he was also "not persuaded" that there was anything that supported an "improper motive" in the the police and prosecutors pursuing a case against Mr Grier.

He said that an assessment of the damages had been made on the hypothesis that Mr Grier (below) was found to have been malciously prosecuted.

"I have not so held, although I have made a finding that there was no objective reasonable and probable cause for either the detention and charging of the pursuer or his subsequent prosecution."

In relation to the claim against Police Scotland, he said: "I find that the police had no motive other than to bring an individual perceived to be a criminal to justice.

"It was emphasised by the court in Whitehouse v Lord Advocate that malice was not to be inferred from, among other things, incompetence, poor judgment, lack of professionalism or recklessness.

"Much of the police investigation suffered from these faults but that is not enough to meet the test.

"No 'illegitimate or oblique motive' or deliberate misuse of the process of the court has been demonstrated.

"In so far as the police recommendation to charge the pursuer might be characterised as reckless, I use that word in the sense of over-zealousness, as opposed to indifference as to whether the case against him was supportable and I do not therefore consider that it is recklessness of a kind from which an improper motive can be inferred."

During the case it was alleged privileged documents were being relied on to secure prosecutions. t But Lord Tyre said: "There was no conclusive evidence that the Crown officials knew of, far less were party to, the accessing of privileged material by the police.

During the hearings, Mr Grier's representatives claimed that Detective Chief Inspector Jim Robertson and his colleagues failed to disclose to the Crown an email in which one of Mr Grier’s co-accused told another “don’t tell David anything", which he said showed that his client had not been part of a criminal conspiracy.

But Lord Tyre said that the existence of the 'don’t tell David' email was not at any time concealed from the Mr Grier's legal team.

"I hold that the pursuer’s case of malicious prosecution against the Lord Advocate has not been made out," he said.

"I recognise that comparisons may be drawn between my decision in this case and the outcome of the actions at the instance of Mr Whitehouse and Mr Clark, in each of which the Lord Advocate admitted liability for malicious prosecution.

"I do not regard it as appropriate to attempt to identify reasons why admissions of liability were made in those cases but no finding of liability is made in this case. The admissions of liability were decisions taken by the Crown in the light of the factual circumstances as they were perceived.

"My task is to assess the evidence presented to the court by the parties in relation to the claim by [Mr Grier] without being influenced by the extra-judicial outcome of those other cases or by anything said by the Lord Advocate by way of explanation for that outcome."

In August, last year, former Rangers chief executive Charles Green won over £6m from the Lord Advocate in a settlement over his £20m claim for being wrongfully prosecuted in the club fraud case.

Mr Green, whose Sevco consortium, bought the assets of the club business in liquidation nine years ago for £5.5m was due to receive compensation after Crown lawyers accepted he was subjected to a malicious fraud prosecution.

Mr Green, now based in Dubai, was told four years ago he would face no further proceedings in connection with the case as prosecutors said there is "now no evidence of a crime".

Mr Whyte, who ended up being the last man standing in the long-running case, was cleared in the summer of 2017 of all charges in connection with his 2011 club purchase.

Appeal judges are expected to hear the arguments for and against Lord Tyre's conclusions in October.