CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

Based on the evidence in front of it, in particular the witness statements which again the Panel notes were not before the Adjudicatory Chamber, the letters issued by Etihad executives and the accounting evidence provided by MCFC, the majority of the Panel is not comfortably satisfied that the arrangements discussed in the Leaked Emails were in fact executed. ​
 
Well we know certain twitter media fools will run it with time barred even after this detailed explanation.
 
EeBdoAOWkAETQk1
 
So this is hilarious. Owe you one @Prestwich_Blue. From page 66:

Mr. Pearce disputes UEFA's reading of Leaked Email No. 1 and testified that the reference to "His Highness" in such email was not a reference to His Highness Sheikh Mansour as alleged by UEFA, but to His Highness Sheikh Sultan Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, the Chairman of ADTA at the time.
Click to expand...
 
Actually 9 clubs were in the Hateful Eight - Newcastle too. Explicitly was to prevent a stay of the judgement. No stay request was made, so it was irreelvant to the matter.

City suggested the panel chairman, UEFA said that was fine with them.
 
Para 84 confirms that the emails were edited selectively and two were merged to give a completely misleading impression.

Also 'HH' was not Sheikh Mansour. Sorry @cjn - posted that then saw your post.

And Tony Evans' claim that UEFA weren't substantially relying on the emails was complete bollocks. That was their whole case, as I said.
 


Email 4 is I think the one that Der Spielgel posted as:-

The club and its sponsors were manipulating their contracts. When Chumillas asked his colleague Simon Pearce if they could change the date of payment for the sponsors from Abu Dhabi, Pearce answered in the spirit of Manchester City's executives: "Of course, we can do what we want."
Click to expand...
 
domalino said:
The Conclusions.


The Court of Arbitration for Sport rules that:
1. The appeal filed on 24 February 2020 by Manchester City Football Club Limited against the decision issued on 14 February 2020 by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the Club Financial Control Body of the Union des Associations Europdennes de Football is partially upheld.

2. The decision issued on 14 February 2020 by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the Club Financial Control Body of the Union des Associations Européennes de Football is set aside and is replaced by the following:

a. Manchester City Football Club Limited has contravened Article 56 of the Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.

b. Manchester City Football Club Limited shall pay a fine of EUR 10,000,000 to the Union des Associations Europdennes de Football, within 30 days as from the date of issuance of the present arbitral award.

c. Manchester City Football Club Limited shall pay an amount of EUR 100,000 to the Union des Associations Européennes de Football on account of the legal costs incurred by the CFCB up until the issuance of the decision issued on 14 February 2020 by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the Club Financial Control Body of the Union des Associations Européennes de Football, within 30 days as from the date of issuance of the present arbitral award.

3. The costs of the arbitration, to be determined and served to the Parties by the CAS Court Office, shall be borne by both Parties in equal shares.

4. Each Party shall bear its own legal fees and other expenses incurred in connection with the present appeal arbitration proceedings.

5. All other and flirther motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
Click to expand...
They should be paying our costs
 
domalino said:
Based on the evidence in front of it, in particular the witness statements which again the Panel notes were not before the Adjudicatory Chamber, the letters issued by Etihad executives and the accounting evidence provided by MCFC, the majority of the Panel is not comfortably satisfied that the arrangements discussed in the Leaked Emails were in fact executed. ​
Click to expand...

It basically does appear that they had some emails and that was it, as I see it.
City then declined to make UEFA's case better.
 
decmancity said:
Why the fuck have Newcastle and Burnley on this, I guess they were promised some cast offs at a super low price like Sunderland etc used to sign from the rags if they added their names.
Click to expand...

Burnley were in the top 10, and not far off UEFA places. Having an extra place to the league was presumably the reason.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
It basically does appear that they had some emails and that was it, as I see it.
City then declined to make UEFA's case better.
Click to expand...
It doesn't even look like they had emails to me, all they seem to have had were edited and faked emails reported on in a backwater German paper! It'd be unbelievable and pretty hilarious if the whole thing hadn't been so damaging to the club.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top