UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[lancs blue]

Effectively saying that they have evidence that deserves this ban but refusing to disclose this is surely something CAS would be unable to accept if they are truly meaning to find a solution?
The usual compromise of a lesser fine or upholding its severity has gone so what will CAS do, will they dismiss the UEFA verdict totally or give them further time to decide to reveal it under threat of rejecting the verdict totally.
If they reveal their evidence to CAS but not to City is that fair or even if they do reveal it to both ie us and CAS will we be allowed to respond within a reasonable time to what we are charged with?

I can understand UEFA not revealing stuff they feel will form part of an along the line non CAS legal dispute but perhaps they should not have given us a sentence then and should have waited for our legal case to form.

They can't do that, all evidence has to be submitted to CAS and exchanged between the relevant parties.

R44.1 Written Submissions

The proceedings before the Panel comprise written submissions and, in principle, an
oral hearing. Upon receipt of the file and if necessary, the President of the Panel shall
issue directions in connection with the written submissions. As a general rule, there
shall be one statement of claim, one response and, if the circumstances so require, one
reply and one second response. The parties may, in the statement of claim and in the
response, raise claims not contained in the request for arbitration and in the answer to
the request. Thereafter, no party may raise any new claim without the consent of the
other party.
Together with their written submissions, the parties shall produce all written evidence
upon which they intend to rely. After the exchange of the written submissions, the
parties shall not be authorized to produce further written evidence, except by mutual
agreement, or if the Panel so permits, on the basis of exceptional circumstances.

 

[salfordbluetrue]

Apparently "If you break ze rules you should be punished" from no lesser genius as "Le Professeur" A. Wenger.

What a typically academic and inciteful comment for Talkshite to run with. Journalism at its best.

I read what Wenger said it was hilarious, he started with City bought ALL his players, then he names 4, of which one was out of contract and free, he then goes on about punishing City before saying he does not know the FFP rules, brilliant

 

[SilverFox2]

I might have missed earlier stuff, but why do you think UEFA withheld evidence from City?
That would automatically go badly on appeal.

Did they.not say they would not publish their reasoning if City appealled the sentence?

Perhaps I mistake their statement.

 

[OB1]

I think the trail indicates the money originated from the EC but MAY have been routed through ADUG.
My point is that if this is the case then the routing through ADUG is not just a trivial post box issue.
The result being that we could be in breach of FFP.

We could not be in breach of FFP if the money originated from the EC, regardless of how it was routed. Even if wording in FFP suggested that was some sort of breach, any competent court or arbitration body would look at the substance of the transaction and find in City's favour.

 

[OB1]

Hold nearly a 40 year grudge against Spurs

You are not alone.

 

[SilverFox2]

They can't do that, all evidence has to be submitted to CAS and exchanged between the relevant parties.

R44.1 Written Submissions

The proceedings before the Panel comprise written submissions and, in principle, an
oral hearing. Upon receipt of the file and if necessary, the President of the Panel shall
issue directions in connection with the written submissions. As a general rule, there
shall be one statement of claim, one response and, if the circumstances so require, one
reply and one second response. The parties may, in the statement of claim and in the
response, raise claims not contained in the request for arbitration and in the answer to
the request. Thereafter, no party may raise any new claim without the consent of the
other party.
Together with their written submissions, the parties shall produce all written evidence
upon which they intend to rely. After the exchange of the written submissions, the
parties shall not be authorized to produce further written evidence, except by mutual
agreement, or if the Panel so permits, on the basis of exceptional circumstances.

Thanks.

 

[lancs blue]

Did they.not say they would not publish their reasoning if City appealled the sentence?

Perhaps I mistake their statement.

Wasn't that related to public disclosure of the reasoning, clearly they have to reveal it to CAS and City, anything else would be nonsensical.

 

[waspish]

Either way, someone felt they needed to make the point. But there's two reasons why I don't think it happened that way:
1. It would be monumentally fucking stupid to do so after being explicitly warned not to.
2. UEFA wouldn't have needed to be tipped off by a hacked email 4 years later; they'd have picked it up first time round.

They go through our accounts every season so the leaked emails brought it to there attention and why they have banned us.

 

[SilverFox2]

Wasn't that related to public disclosure of the reasoning, clearly they have to reveal it to CAS and City, anything else would be nonsensical.

Ta.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Did they.not say they would not publish their reasoning if City appealled the sentence?

Perhaps I mistake their statement.

I suspect you have - it's really difficult to organise a defence when you don't know what you're trying to refute!

I think what they meant is that they won't publish their judgement as the case is essentially still ongoing.