From the BBC
A judge has ruled that the Scottish Football Association (SFA) acted beyond its powers in imposing a year-long transfer ban on Rangers FC.
The ban was given, along with a fine of £100,000, after the club was charged with bringing the game into disrepute.
Rangers challenged the ban at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, on the grounds it was not one of the sanctions listed in the SFA's own regulations.
Lord Glennie said the ban should be reconsidered by the SFA appeal panel.
An SFA disciplinary tribunal originally imposed the fine and placed an embargo on Rangers signing senior players for 12 months in April this year.
The disrepute charge was handed down mainly over the club's failure to pay more than £13m in taxes last season.
That decision was upheld by an SFA appeals tribunal, including the judge Lord Carloway, earlier this month.
Judicial review
The club went to the Court of Session to challenge the decision on the additional transfer ban sanction in a judicial review of the tribunal decision.
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
The sanction of suspending the registration of players is not available under the general disciplinary rules to the tribunal in respect of the alleged breach”
Richard Keen QC
Lord Glennie ruled that the SFA appeals tribunal was wrong in holding that it had the power to impose the additional sanction in the case and that in doing so they were acting outside their powers.
The judge set aside the decision and said he would send it back to the SFA appeal tribunal to look at it again in light of his decision.
He said the fact that he had found the extra penalty imposed on Rangers to be outside of the powers available did not necessarily mean the club would escape a lighter punishment.
Lord Glennie said that was a matter for the association.
The judge also rejected an argument made on behalf of the SFA that the correct venue for deciding any dispute was the Swiss-based Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Rangers counsel Richard Keen QC, the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, told the court: "We are the victim of an unlawful sanction and we have had imposed on us a sanction that the SFA panel had no right to impose."
Mr Keen had argued that the transfer ban was outside its powers and said that under the appropriate rule a fine, suspension and expulsion were available.
Original tribunal
Aidan O'Neill QC, for the football authorities, had argued that the tribunal sought to find a sanction which would fit the breach committed.
He said it was clearly thought that the fine was "simply not enough given the mavity of the issues here".
Mr O'Neill said that if their powers of penalty were restricted to sanctions such as suspension or expulsion then suspension would have to be looked at.
He added the current sanction allowed Rangers to continue to trade and play.
Mr Keen said that if the matter was to be sent back it should go to the original tribunal to look at the question of sanction if that was considered appropriate.
After the club was placed in administration in February, senior players took substantial wage cuts.
Lord Glennie awarded the expenses of the proceedings to Rangers after saying that he took the view that the club had substantially succeeded on "the narrow point" before the court.
The decision now places Rangers on a possible collision course with football's governing bodies.
Prior to the court's decision, the world governing body Fifa said: "Fifa will ask the member association (SFA) to take action so that the club withdraws its request from the ordinary courts.
"Fifa will closely monitor the situation so that the issue is resolved as fast as possible."
