Financial experts trying to revive ailing football giant Rangers FC are scheduled to try to add the best part of £30 million to the club's coffers at a High Court fight later this year.
A High Court judge said on Monday that cash claims by Rangers' administrators Duff and Phelps would be tried in London in October.
Lawyers representing Duff and Phelps, a London-based firm of financial advisers, wanted a trial in July but could not persuade Mr Justice Arnold to set a summer date.
They told the judge that cost-cutting meant Rangers would complete this season but that there would be "difficulties" next season.
But Mr Justice Arnold, who heard legal argument at a preliminary hearing in London, said there would be no ruling before the start of the new season in August, even if proceedings were "expedited" so a trial could be staged in July.
Administrators want to get their hands on £3.6m which was held in an account belonging to club owner Craig Whyte's London-based solicitors.
But a number of other organisations, including tax authorities, have also staked a claim and a judge is being asked to rule on who should get what.
Administrators also claim that Mr Whyte and a lawyer were part of an unlawful conspiracy and want around £25m damages for the club.
Mr Justice Arnold said argument on both claims could be heard at the High Court in October.
Mark Phillips QC, for Duff and Phelps, outlined Rangers's plight to the judge.
"This club is in administration and it is in a lot of difficulty. There has been put in place cash savings which means that it can complete this season."
But he added: "Next season we will have difficulties."
Mr Phillips also told the judge in a written statement: "The club's future is now in jeopardy. The ... administrators are seeking to find a buyer but the negotiations are complex, difficult and fraught, and leading bidders have pulled out of the race in recent days.
"The ... administrators are struggling to keep the club in business. Money is tight and time is short."
Mr Justice Arnold said he understood the administrators' position.
"Clearly the administrators need to put the club on a stable a financial footing as possible," said the judge.
"As I see it, there is no critical difference between a judgment becoming available in, say, September 2012 and a judgment becoming available in, say, November 2012."