Rangers face a court challenge to determine whether they are within their rights to dismiss a proposed vote on boardroom change.
Former Rangers chairman Malcolm Murray and Paul Murray, who was an Ibrox director before being removed by Craig Whyte, were among a group of shareholders who raised a petition at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in a bid to force a vote on their admission as directors along with Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson.
A hearing was held where it was decided that a judicial review first hearing will take place at the court on October 14.
Earlier this week, on the same day Rangers announced an operating loss of £14.4million, the club confirmed they had rejected a request to distribute notice of the proposed vote to shareholders ahead of the annual general meeting on October 24.
However, they could now be forced to stage an election at the AGM to determine whether the four proposed nominees can join the board.
A spokesman for the petitioners said: “We are delighted with today’s hearing and we look forward to having the opportunity of establishing the validity of our proposed director nominations on Monday October 14 at the full hearing.
“In the meantime we would ask shareholders to firstly do nothing until it is clear what they are being asked to vote upon at the AGM and secondly note the actions of this board of directors, who seem hell bent on putting up every legal and technical blockage to our nominations.
“Why are they so scared of a vote if they have all the shareholder support they claim to have?
“It is ridiculous that we are forced into going to the Court of Session in order to give the shareholders a democratic vote at the AGM.
“The stalling tactics of this board are indicative of why the shareholders felt compelled to make these requisitions in the first place.”
A Rangers statement to the London Stock Exchange read: “The petitioners sought interim orders to prevent the annual general meeting of the company from taking place on 24 October 2013. No such orders were granted by the court.”
The statement went on to say that while the company considers its legal position “robust”, it had been agreed that the AGM would go ahead as planned on October 24, with a vote included if the petitioners are successful on October 14.