A LAWYER for promoted Scottish clubs argued yesterday that Hearts and Partick Thistle have no right to take their case against relegation to the Court of Session.

The first hearing of the legal battle took place via video link yesterday under the authority of the Edinburgh court.

Hearts and Thistle launched the action after several attempts at SPFL reconstruction failed to halt them slipping down a division, along with Stranraer, when clubs voted to curtail the season amid the Covid-19 crisis.

Lord Clark heard arguments from Garry Borland QC, acting for promoted clubs Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, that the case should not have been brought to court at all.

Mr Borland said that clubs were “contractually obliged” to comply with SPFL rules and Scottish FA articles, and that the row was a “football dispute” which required to be settled by arbitration under the latter.

Lord Clark pointed out that there was a potential timing issue with taking the case to arbitration, given that the Premiership season is due to start in early August, and questioned whether it would be feasible for that process to decide the matter beforehand.

Borland said it was, but blamed the petitioners for the timing issue — given that they had waited two months to launch legal action.

He said it was “inconceivable” that the league could be halted if Hearts subsequently won their argument. The petitioners have recognised that reality, as they have sought damages if their attempts to avert relegation failed.

“It is obvious that the present dispute arises out of and relates to association football,” Borland said. “The contention of the petitioners to the contrary is fanciful.

“What they are attempting to do is stop relegation and promotion, which has been decided. Promotion and relegation are fundamental parts of football. They are the meat and drink of football.”

Lawyers for the SPFL and the two clubs were due to speak later in the afternoon, while the hearing could be extended until later in the week.

Lord Clark recognised the benefits of dealing with the matter “as swiftly as possible” but accepted that the complexity of the matter might take time to consider.