PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

PL will be investigating next season what is extra revenue from Fifa that no other PL clubs are getting in 23-24.
 
Ric said:
Pretty sure this is incorrect. If fraud/concealment is proved then the statute of limitations doesn't apply.
Click to expand...
That’s not quite correct.

if fraud or concealment is proved, the limitation period still applies (6 years) but the period starts to run from the point at which the fraud was discovered, which the PL would say was the publication of the Der Spiegel articles

In other words, if there is fraud, we are within the limitation period, but if there is no fraud there is no case to answer in any event
 
Chris in London said:
That’s not quite correct.

if fraud or concealment is proved, the limitation period still applies (6 years) but the period starts to run from the point at which the fraud was discovered, which the PL would say was the publication of the Der Spiegel articles

In other words, if there is fraud, we are within the limitation period, but if there is no fraud there is no case to answer in any event.
Click to expand...

I love it when I get something right. :)
 
IMO it would now cause an ‘international incident’ if City were found guilty and given a significant punishment.
 
Chris in London said:
That’s not quite correct.

if fraud or concealment is proved, the limitation period still applies (6 years) but the period starts to run from the point at which the fraud was discovered, which the PL would say was the publication of the Der Spiegel articles

In other words, if there is fraud, we are within the limitation period, but if there is no fraud there is no case to answer in any event
Click to expand...
And the question has to be then, if there has been fraud, why hasn't there been an ounce of interest shown by any of the prosecuting authorities such as the SFO or HMRC (if there had been I very much doubt we wouldn't know about it).
 
Last edited:
Chris in London said:
That’s not quite correct.

if fraud or concealment is proved, the limitation period still applies (6 years) but the period starts to run from the point at which the fraud was discovered, which the PL would say was the publication of the Der Spiegel articles

In other words, if there is fraud, we are within the limitation period, but if there is no fraud there is no case to answer in any event
Click to expand...
Really stupid question but could the delay be PL waiting for SFO to complete an investigation or would an investigation of that magnitude be in the public domain?
 
ganganvince said:
Really stupid question but could the delay be PL waiting for SFO to complete an investigation or would an investigation of that magnitude be in the public domain?
Click to expand...

It would probably have to be disclosed in the accounts. It wasn't.

Anyway, I very much doubt any agency would be interested. If we have overstated income, then we will be paying more tax at some point, not less, so HMRC wouldn't be interested, and I don't think the PL has anything like near enough evidence for the SFO to open an investigation.

All imho, of course.
 
jaiguruKun said:
And the question has to be then, if there has been fraud, why hasn't there been an ounce of interest shown by any of the prosecuting authorities such as the SFO or HMRC (if there had been there's I very much doubt we wouldn't know about it).
Click to expand...

And why would a major company like Kellogs climb into bed with us now if fraud charges were likely?
 
halfcenturyup said:
It would probably have to be disclosed in the accounts. It wasn't.

Anyway, I very much doubt any agency would be interested. If we have overstated income, then we will be paying more tax at some point, not less, so HMRC wouldn't be interested, and I don't think the PL has anything like near enough evidence for the SFO to open an investigation.

All imho, of course.
Click to expand...
In English Law we've done nothing wrong or illegal. BUT according to the Premier League's "Rules", they reckon we're guilty.

The PL's rules are NOT the law of the land. They're the rules of their private members club, which they can kick us out of.

This is why no statutory bodies have ever been involved, & never will. The PL are essentially acting as Judge, Jury & Executioner, hence why the UK Government has stepped in with an independent regulator, because the PL are ultimately threatening £10bn of UK investment from Abu Dhabi.

Nothing stands in the way of big money, as UEFA & the PL have found out. ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯
 
Chris in London said:
That’s not quite correct.

if fraud or concealment is proved, the limitation period still applies (6 years) but the period starts to run from the point at which the fraud was discovered, which the PL would say was the publication of the Der Spiegel articles

In other words, if there is fraud, we are within the limitation period, but if there is no fraud there is no case to answer in any event
Click to expand...
Couldn't it be argued that the Der Spiegel article was merely a rehash of the charges we faced in 2014? Doesn't this fall under double jeopardy?
 
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