MILLWALL HOLDINGS PLC
Posted on: Mon 07 Apr 2008
London, 7th April 2008: the Board of Millwall Holdings plc (or "the Company") announces that it has received a notice from Mr Graham Ferguson Lacey ("Mr Lacey") and one of his companies, Sports Regeneration Ltd, requiring it to call a General Meeting of the Company for the purpose of considering and voting on two resolutions.
Mr Lacey, both personally and through his company Sports Regeneration Ltd is the largest single shareholder in Millwall Holdings plc with a holding of approximately 28.9%.
The proposed resolutions are fully set out in the notice and seek to stop the Board making any arrangements outside the ordinary course of trading or which could be of material significance, without shareholder approval.
The Board believes the passing of these Resolutions would render it logistically impossible to run the business, incur significant expense and prevent the Directors from being able to manage the company effectively as well as from progressing the regeneration of the Company's properties. Therefore, the Board of the Company having taken advice from counsel, has declined to convene the General Meeting on the basis that the proposed resolutions are vexatious and ineffective.
John G. Berylson, Chairman of Millwall Holdings plc said:"We will take every necessary step to fight this proposal. Mr Lacey is trying to use his minority stake in Millwall to wrest control of the club and the Company away from the Board, and prevent us from implementing our plans for the further development of the club. We continue to make good progress on our regeneration project and his actions put all our good work in jeopardy. Heather Rabbatts, CEO and Deputy Chairman of Millwall Holdings plc said: "Millwall has made significant progress in recent months, securing new sources of funding and planning for a successful future.
So we were naturally surprised and disappointed when we learnt of this action by our largest shareholder.
The motions that Mr Lacey is proposing would make it impossible to manage this club.
This is clearly unworkable and one has to question the motives of Mr Lacey for trying to impose such restrictions on us.
We have every reason to believe that the vast majority of the clubs' 43,000 shareholders strongly support the management's existing plans to develop the club and will agree with us that this proposal from Mr Lacey is wholly self-serving and unworthy of consideration."
Mr Lacey, both personally and through his company Sports Regeneration Ltd is the largest single shareholder in Millwall Holdings plc with a holding of approximately 28.9%.
The proposed resolutions are fully set out in the notice and seek to stop the Board making any arrangements outside the ordinary course of trading or which could be of material significance, without shareholder approval.
The Board believes the passing of these Resolutions would render it logistically impossible to run the business, incur significant expense and prevent the Directors from being able to manage the company effectively as well as from progressing the regeneration of the Company's properties. Therefore, the Board of the Company having taken advice from counsel, has declined to convene the General Meeting on the basis that the proposed resolutions are vexatious and ineffective.
John G. Berylson, Chairman of Millwall Holdings plc said:"We will take every necessary step to fight this proposal. Mr Lacey is trying to use his minority stake in Millwall to wrest control of the club and the Company away from the Board, and prevent us from implementing our plans for the further development of the club. We continue to make good progress on our regeneration project and his actions put all our good work in jeopardy. Heather Rabbatts, CEO and Deputy Chairman of Millwall Holdings plc said: "Millwall has made significant progress in recent months, securing new sources of funding and planning for a successful future.
So we were naturally surprised and disappointed when we learnt of this action by our largest shareholder.
The motions that Mr Lacey is proposing would make it impossible to manage this club.
This is clearly unworkable and one has to question the motives of Mr Lacey for trying to impose such restrictions on us.
We have every reason to believe that the vast majority of the clubs' 43,000 shareholders strongly support the management's existing plans to develop the club and will agree with us that this proposal from Mr Lacey is wholly self-serving and unworthy of consideration."
