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

[Silva2Aguero]

First time poster. Season ticket holder and long time reader.

We are in very very very good hands for this appeal. Obviously the stakes are high, but we have the best possible representation and that puts us in a great position. We effectively have the legal equivalent of a Vincent Kompany and Sergio Aguero combination to take on UEFA, and I hope we take it to them with gusto!

I have published an article expanding on this in more detail if anyone is interested -

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/manchester-city-fc-vs-uefa-most-important-case-millennium-joshua-levy

 

[journolud]

First time poster. Season ticket holder and long time reader.

We are in very very very good hands for this appeal. Obviously the stakes are high, but we have the best possible representation and that puts us in a great position. We effectively have the legal equivalent of a Vincent Kompany and Sergio Aguero combination to take on UEFA, and I hope we take it to them with gusto!

I have published an article expanding on this in more detail if anyone is interested -

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/manchester-city-fc-vs-uefa-most-important-case-millennium-joshua-levy

I enjoyed reading that, let us know when you post updates. In a way there is no new information until this thing gets underway but I like the cut of your jib.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

If it's anything like similar cases then it could be three months
Taken from this piece

https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/...e-ffps-part-deux-the-double-city-do-not-want/


Galatasaray appealed to CAS on 11 March 2016 and on 23 June 2016, CAS announced it was upholding the Adjudicatory Chamber’s decision and dismissed the appeal (https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release_4492.pdf). This is an interesting example of the possible timetable City can expect.

There was a good point in that blog by Stefan which said it was in everyone's interest: City, UEFA, and CAS to get a quick decision because a delay would increase the chances of legal action from other clubs who believed they had a claim on CL places. They want to avoid disrupting the CL even more than it has already been disrupted by the pandemic. That does seem to make sense so I wouldn't be surprised by quick action.
EDIT: I see Projectriver is now saying mid August for a decision and I wouldn't disagree with that.

 

[WRicko]

No. You are not correct. CAS can rule on substantive issues. Google their rules.
Edit PS See rule 57.

Wait surely that cannot be right does that not mean we could be innocent but found guilt because procedure was followed. e.g lets say the timing issue is not actually an issue i.e. CAS agree with UEFA and lets say that CAS also agree that UEFA looked at all the evidence. but lets say the evidence shows we did nothing wrong Etihad not related party money not from Sheik value not inflated etc etc Then CAS would have to rule in favour of UEFA and against us

 

[EricBrooksGhost]

Thanks for that.

So people expecting a quick decision/resolution on this are completely barking up the wrong tree?

-

Why?
The hearing took place at on 16th June and a decision was made on the 23rd.

 

[HelloCity]

First time poster. Season ticket holder and long time reader.

We are in very very very good hands for this appeal. Obviously the stakes are high, but we have the best possible representation and that puts us in a great position. We effectively have the legal equivalent of a Vincent Kompany and Sergio Aguero combination to take on UEFA, and I hope we take it to them with gusto!

I have published an article expanding on this in more detail if anyone is interested -

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/manchester-city-fc-vs-uefa-most-important-case-millennium-joshua-levy

Page not found. Do you need to be signed in?

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Page not found. Do you need to be signed in?

I just clicked on the item and it loaded.

 

[KS55]

Wait surely that cannot be right does that not mean we could be innocent but found guilt because procedure was followed. e.g lets say the timing issue is not actually an issue i.e. CAS agree with UEFA and lets say that CAS also agree that UEFA looked at all the evidence. but lets say the evidence shows we did nothing wrong Etihad not related party money not from Sheik value not inflated etc etc Then CAS would have to rule in favour of UEFA and against us

Eh??
If Uefa rule that we did not infringe FFP, that is the end of it, irrespective of procedural issues.
A separate line of defence may be that Uefa did not follow the correct procedure. If we won that argument, but were found to have infringed FFP, then CAS may give a whole range if judgements from
1) the failure of procedure was so great that the punishment is set aside to
2) the failure of procedure did not substantially infringe our rights, so the punishment stands.
3) plus everything in between, eg a lesser punishment, because our rights were infringed to a certain extent.
Edit PS. There is also the nightmare scenario in which CAS order Uefa to rehear the case, this time obseving correct procedure.

 

[SWP's back]

Am I right in thinking that CAS only have the power to rule on procedural grounds, and not whether the allegations themselves were groundless?

No I don’t think so mate. The pertinent part from their website has been posted before.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Wait surely that cannot be right does that not mean we could be innocent but found guilt because procedure was followed. e.g lets say the timing issue is not actually an issue i.e. CAS agree with UEFA and lets say that CAS also agree that UEFA looked at all the evidence. but lets say the evidence shows we did nothing wrong Etihad not related party money not from Sheik value not inflated etc etc Then CAS would have to rule in favour of UEFA and against us

I'd imagine the sequence of events would be something like:

1. Did UEFA have the right, under their own rules, to re-open the case?
2. Did UEFA have the right, under the 2014 settlement agrement, to re-open the case?
3. If the answer to both the above is 'Yes', then did they correctly follow their own procedural rules for judging this issue?
4. Was the IC judgement made impartially after consideration of all available evidence or was there any impropriety in arriving at that decision?
5. Did the AC follow their prescribed procedural rules in reacing their decision to confirm the decision of the IC or was there any interference in the supposedly independent body?
6. Were we given the opportunity to present ourr side of events at all stages?
7. Does UEFA's case against us have any merit on the basis of the evidence available?

• We will presumably argue strongly that the decisions in 1 & 2 were incorrect and had no legal basis
• I suspect we have something to prove the process in 4 & possibly 5 was flawed. I also reckon we've got our sights heavily on Leterme here, plus we may well have some evidence that there was pressure from some of the G-14 and/or members of the Exco brought to bear to ensure our punishment was as harsh as possible.
• We may well argue that we weren't given sufficient opportunity to present our defence to the CFCB.
• We will presumably argue quite strongly that we haven't broken any rules and that UEFA's evdence, via Der Spiegel, is circumstantial and paints a completely false picture of the situation.

We could win on every one of those points but even winning on one could be enough to see the ban overturned.