After Mortonjag was appointed by the Sheriff as Mr Gallacher’s official lay representative, he and Trust member Gordon Dyer had a meeting with Trust solicitors – Blair & Bryden – last December. While debating the ‘mandate’ issue, Mr. Harvey asserted that he was ‘entitled to take instructions from the Trust Chairman’.
He did not, however, disagree with Mortonjag’s proposition that that fact failed to render those instructions legally competent unless they represented the views of the Trust membership.
Mortonjag then posed a question about the ‘legal advice’ cited repeatedly in the foregoing ‘circular’. When Mr. Harvey appeared confused, Gordon Dyer handed him his own copy. Mr. Harvey raised an eyebrow several times while reading the contents before confirming that THE ADVICE THEREIN HAD NOT COME FROM BLAIR & BRYDEN, and asking – ‘Who is Feeney?’
Almost four months after the Trust’s A.G.M., he mistakenly believed that the TOADMEISTER was still Chairman! Mortonjag’s readers may well be asking ask why that was, but much more importantly –
WHERE DID THAT ‘LEGAL ADVICE’ COME FROM?
Had young Feeney let new found power go to his head, and wasted yet more of the members’ money by throwing their lost cause at a SECOND legal firm? He’d certainly stated emphatically in that document that the properly convened S.G.M. was vetoed ‘ON LEGAL ADVICE’.
Allan may well be brash, impressionable, and foolish, but Mortonjag does not rate him as a liar of TOADMEISTER proportions, and athough that document is framed in stilted Plonker prose, several phrases STINK OF TOAD! Mortonjag has no doubt whatsoever that THAT ‘LEGAL ADVICE’ CAME DIRECTLY FROM FUHRER ROBINSON HIMSELF!!
It most certainly did NOT come from the Trust’s solicitors!
A properly convened S.G.M. at which the Trust membership was at last to have stated its views on G.M.S.T. v Gallacher had apparently been cynically and unconstitutionally brushed aside in yet another TOADMEISTER scam intended to deceive the Trust membership and pervert the course of justice.
The Wemyss Bay insolvency practitioner and Greenock Morton director is well known for his unique interpretations of ‘Scots Law’
NOT ONLY DID HIS CLIENT DEFEND THE CASE – IT WAS ALSO DISMISSED IN HIS FAVOUR!