SFA watchdogs didn't apply the principles of ''natural justice" when they fined Newcastle owner Mike Ashley over his company's involvement with Rangers, a court has heard.

Advocate Craig Sandison QC claimed that the Scottish Football Association acted wrongly when they concluded that Mr Ashley broke the organisation's dual ownership rules.

The SFA fined Mr Ashley £1,000 in June 2015 for taking an 8.92 per cent stake in the Glasgow team.

They concluded that Mr Ashley broke their rules about how an individual should not be involved with two football clubs at the same time.

But lawyers acting for Mr Ashley told judge Lord Brodie that the SFA had acted wrongly.

Mr Sandison said it was Mr Ashley's company - MASH Holdings- that controlled the Rangers shares.

He told the court that there was a legal difference between Mr Ashley as a person and MASH Holdings.

Consequently, Mr Sandison said that the SFA should have appreciated the differences and not have fined Mr Ashley.

He told the court: "The panel did not apply the principles of natural justice in relation to the factual matters that were put before them.

"Their reaction was unjustified and we seek a reduction of their decision."

Mr Sandison was addressing the court on the first day of a two day judicial review hearing at the court.

He is asking Lord Brodie to overturn decisions made last year by the SFA's judicial panel and appellate tribunal.

His client Mr Ashley was originally fined £7,500 by the judicial panel.

However, it was reduced to £1,000 after an appeal.

The Sports Direct billionaire was represented on the club's board by his associates Derek Llambias and Barry Leach before being forced out by chairman Dave King in March 2015.

Mr Ashley also gave a £5 million loan to Rangers in January last year.

SFA rules state that no individuals can have influence over the management and administration of another club.

The Scottish Football Association ruled that the loan gave the Newcastle owner a "measure of power over the management and administration of another club."

On Thursday, Mr Ashley's lawyer told the court that the SFA had misunderstood who actually owned the shares.

He said it was Mr Ashley's company and not the businessman who controlled the shares.

Consequently, Mr Sandison argued that the SFA were wrong to fine Mr Ashley.

He added: "There is no basis at all for the SFA's decision." The SFA are contesting the judicial review. Their lawyers claim that the panels had made the correct decision. The association is represented by advocate Aidan O'Neill QC.

The hearing continues.