PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[chesterbells]

A Burnley supporter on 606 last night said that he heard at their game yesterday that all the charges are going to be dropped.

What did Sutton say in response?

 

[burning blue soul]

For the second, Haaland has control of the ball and was denied a goalscoring opportunity. That wasn't the case for the first.

Listen to what you are saying. It makes no sense.
The ball had been passed to City players for them to make an attempt at goal, they were stopped from taking the shot because of unlawful challenges.
It's the same, exactly the same.
You saying that because Gvardiol hadn't put the ball under his control the defender has the right to take him out?

 

[CC1]

A Burnley supporter on 606 last night said that he heard at their game yesterday that all the charges are going to be dropped.

Probably heard it from someone who had read our forum. so no real source!!

 

[cibaman]

Am I right in thinking that City would have had to prepare 115 written defence statements? Could it be that they’ve completed that process, submitted them to the PL’s lawyers and they’ve now reviewed them to decide whether they would be likely to succeed if it went to the full inquiry?

 

[jrb]

Does anyone think the PL will still go ahead with the case if the rumours are true just to save some face and to give the impression the PL tried to charge City with the 115 allegations rather than just giving up and trying to agree a deal with City in private? UEFA tried again and lost at CAS. There are numerous instances of this happening with the Police, the CPS, newspapers and other organisations that knew they were wrong and wouldn’t win the case, but they still went ahead with the case and lost.

 

[Vienna_70]

What did Sutton say in response?

I don’t remember. I think both he and Savage made very little of it.

 

[Vienna_70]

Probably heard it from someone who had read our forum. so no real source!!

Yeah, maybe.

 

[BlueAnorak]

City certainly have a good case for vexacious litigation. If the PL had any sense - they would have dropped the charges that we were cleared of by CAS.
But the "red mist" had descended.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Similarly, contrary to the Anti City loonies on the Web, time baring certainly exists in UK civil litigation.

Limitation Periods | LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers

City of London Litigation Lawyers. Legal advice on professional negligence, insolvency, breach of contract, HMRC tax disputes, debt recovery. Call 02071830529.

lexlaw.co.uk

And unless the PL could find us guilty of a criminal act (i.e. false accounting) everything before 2016ish goes away. (It depends when the PL investigation started it could be later than that).
Probably, the worst case for many of the older charges is we could be found guilty of the offence but not punished because of the time bar. But I hold that many of the older charges were there to put us in a bad light as a perennial lieing and cheating organisation.

 

[Blue Llama]

Similarly, contrary to the Anti City loonies on the Web, time baring certainly exists in UK civil litigation.

Limitation Periods | LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers

City of London Litigation Lawyers. Legal advice on professional negligence, insolvency, breach of contract, HMRC tax disputes, debt recovery. Call 02071830529.

lexlaw.co.uk

And unless the PL could find us guilty of a criminal act (i.e. false accounting) everything before 2016ish goes away. (It depends when the PL investigation started it could be later than that).
Probably, the worst case for many of the older charges is we could be found guilty of the offence but not punished because of the time bar. But I hold that many of the older charges were there to put us in a bad light as a perennial lieing and cheating organisation.

There is no time bar