Duff & PhelpsA PS25 million lawsuit has been initiated against theCrown Office and Procurator Fiscal ServiceOver the scandal of malicious prosecution
New York-based multinational said it suffered earnings loss after two of its employees were maliciously charged over their roles in Rangers’ collapse and sale.
David WhitehouseAndPaul ClarkThe two men who managed the club’s finances from February 2012 to February 2012 have won damages of PS21m from the Crown Office and an apology from the Lord Advocate for their “very serious failures in the system of prosecution”. To settle claims by several businessmen, PS30million has been paid.
Dean of FacultyRoddy Dunlop, QCThe company will be represented by, in the Court of Session. According to the firm, it has suffered significant losses since the wrongful prosecution.
Former Lord AdvocateJames Wolffe, QC, has proposed an “entitled-to-sue” point that states: “Is misfeasance actionable for the pursuer.”
Mr Dunlop stated that the defendant was referring to the fact that we did not prosecute Duff and Phelps, which is why the beef is missing. Is it possible for a party to be prosecuted but not themselves, and who claims significant reputational harm from a prosecution that was misconduct in public office? If so, can that party claim title, or is that actionable?