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

[RNBlue]

Sad but true. It is not just the sports pages either.

in the last 20(ish) years the British media have stopped reporting on the news and instead become the generator of news and thus become the influencers of social and political opinion for/to the public.

 

[petrusha]

On the question of re-opening the old agreement, I'm guessing that UEFA will contend that we deceived them with our submissions and with the accounts that they audited. That might help them, but they would probably need to convince the panel of the deception as a first step. If that failed, the part of the 'charges' relating to those years would fall.

I assume so. We don't know whether there's a provision in the settlement agreement expressly stating that it can be reopened if new information emerges or whether UEFA are relying, in the absence of such an express provision, on some other doctrine under Swiss law.

 

[bluwes]

I assume so. We don't know whether there's a provision in the settlement agreement expressly stating that it can be reopened if new information emerges or whether UEFA are relying, in the absence of such an express provision, on some other doctrine under Swiss law.

seem to remember Stefan on the 93:20 podcast saying that there was no provision. Anyone else recall it

 

[spiny]

Always interested to compare the news as reported in so called less developed countries compared with the so called developed countries like the UK now driven by agendas and clickbait.

I stopped buying newspapers 20 years ago and ignore radio and television news. In the past, these were a must for everyone but those days are long gone. The clicks dictate the narrative as viewers ansd sales plummet. As said so many times on here, the reporting on FFP has been despicable apart from Martin Samuel.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Always like reading your posts

I cant see City letting Ceferin see what they have got with all the leaks within UEFA. My view on our owner and directors is that nothing gets out that they dont want out. Informing him we have irrefutable evidence maybe, but not going into detail because of the risk of leaks. Unless, unless he is briefing City. Even I am going round in circles now, must go for a lie down in the sun.

I don't think we'd have shown him our evidence related to the case specifically but more what we've got on other clubs. If that was the case then we'd have said to him that he's backing the wrong horse if he's on the side of the cartel.

 

[petrusha]

I thought he said that, based on the case law in CAS in which provisions of other settlement agreements have been discussed, there's been no evidence of any of them reserve's UEFA's right to revisit in certain circumstances. But if the full texts are confidential, you can never be sure.

I had a discussion with him on this thread, sometime way back, about the possibility that there's no express provision, in which case UEFA might be relying on the Swiss contract law doctrine of good faith on this point. He thought that would be quite a big hurdle to overcome and I suspect he's right, but of course there may be facts of the case of which we're unaware that mean the usual position doesn't apply here.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Jose Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues

The very same judge which was pissed with Uefa for letting Paris off the hook, so decided to make sure we were found guilty.

 

[nmc]

On the question of re-opening the old agreement, I'm guessing that UEFA will contend that we deceived them with our submissions and with the accounts that they audited. That might help them, but they would probably need to convince the panel of the deception as a first step. If that failed, the part of the 'charges' relating to those years would fall.

Of course if our accounts have deceived UEFA they have probably also deceived our auditors so our Directors might also face criminal charges. UEFA need to understand the seriousness of their allegations.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

No, I dont think so, more a case of slack auditing if we dld indeed try to pull the wool. But I don't think we did, otherwise Soriano and Khaldoon would not have been so adamant.

Quite. I don''t see what the auditors could be caught out by.

Assuming they have the proof of three payments from Sponsors A, B and C, it's of no interest to them where the money may have come from before getting to B and C.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

All this about City's accounts and what our auditors might have missed and when they might have missed is fascinating. I can't help wondering how much trouble UEFA might go to now to trace the origin of payments to Liverpool from their money launderers. I wonder if Khaldoon can give them a bit of a hand.