City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)

[moomba]

I'm not sure the club is angling for the end to APT/FFP/PSR/SCR.

Just that it's fair for everyone.

And until that happens I'll back them on any legal action they think necessary.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

I find the knee jerk, unread, criticisms of Stefans considered comments to be bizarre.

Shoot the fucking messenger eh?

If you are going to disagree, at least try to put up a reasoned argument.

 

[cheekybids]

Stupendous

 

[Micky Blue]

Best I could do in a short space of time...
View attachment 146760

Can we get this made into a flag?

 

[Kazzydeyna]

I'm far from a legal expert but if the rules are now void, it's surely pretty much a free pass for all clubs. all clubs should be able to easily say we can't comply with rules that don't exist and we can't be expected to have budgeted to comply with rules they weren't aware of.


I don't know who they are, name the cunts.

Don Howe. (Howard hockin). He of the robust, and patented “rants”.

Basically, a **** who sees City as a means to an end. He has a lot of friends on here though so I’m probably going to get banned for this.

 

[chesterguy]

I think we all agree that City won on just 3 points regarding the APT rules prior to November. We can also agree that the IC have said those 3 points are sufficient to makes those rules Null and Void.

So up until November 2024 APT rules did not exist except as a concept. City don’t think the rules as voted on in November are legal we await judgement.

The big win for some clubs is that if the were in anyway stymied by the previous rules then they can sue

 

[calumdown]

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Well done, City.

I smile.

 

[slbsn]

Thanks, didn't know that. Straightforward FMV rules via UEFA RP regime have proved no threat to a club of City's stature. The issue with the PL APT add-on is its prejudicial treatment of City sponsors given traditional patterns of company ownership in the Middle East.

They have proved a threat. We had to settle with UEFA in 2014 because of this very issue.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Sky Sports' website finally reporting on this

Man City claim legal victory against Premier League over APT financial rules

In a case brought by Man City, an independent panel has determined that Associated Party Transaction rules are void and unenforceable; it is believed this ruling could open the door for legal action; but the Premier League insists that depends on the judgement on the new rules

www.skysports.com

City have “claimed victory” says the headline. The story does not include anything from the Judges’ statement but all of the Premier League’s. The usual distortion from SKY.

 

[cheekybids]

Massive PR win among journalists and owners for City after the PL responded to the initial judgment by briefing everyone that it wasn’t a victory for city at all and then pushed through new amendments that have now been ruled unlawful as well.


You couldn’t really hope an opponent that’s more incompetent than the PL.

It reminded me of the end of the 12th round & both boxers raise their hands before the score cards are announced….

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

Does thai mean (ironically) smaller clubs who voted for this crap can now also sue if they show loss . Also Everton and forest sueing for loss of earning plus other legal costs and losses. Also if each club are on the hook for premier league costs/compo could this effect every club inc City. And then could clubs not impacted by APT sue for the new financial impact of settlement as premier league acted unlawfully. A can of worms?

This is my opinion. The Premier League, having had their strings pulled by the red shirt puppeteers, embarked on a high risk case without considering all of the consequences. There’s a potential for a right royal mess. Which is why I said from the start is that there were no real winners in any of the possible outcomes.

 

[Damocles]

Greetings from page 1962!

I'm engaged at the moment but when suitably tipsy enough, am going to read through this thread with the biggest smile on my face. Give me more pages.

Let's fucking goooo lads. Reading now.

Fuck these wankers.

 

[Silva61]

will the deals we have pending be pushed through or delayed again now?

Always thought what City want is a level playing field, i dont believe they want an end to APT.What our opponents are scared of is if we ever get that, it will push them back and move us further ahead.
This looks like a win win to me.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

Sky Sports' website finally reporting on this

Man City claim legal victory against Premier League over APT financial rules

In a case brought by Man City, an independent panel has determined that Associated Party Transaction rules are void and unenforceable; it is believed this ruling could open the door for legal action; but the Premier League insists that depends on the judgement on the new rules

www.skysports.com

Er, we "claim" victory?

We have?

Reportage really has gone to the dogs.

 

[jollylescott]

City 2 premier league 0 at half time. First goal by our quality striker Pannick. He cleverly slotted past the league keeper, Masters.

Second goal was an own goal by Masters. He caught the ball and tried to throw to one of his defenders. Unfortunately for the. Premier league he spun around and threw it into his own net.

I can't wait for the second half. Pannick is playing like Haaland on steroids!

Come on City!

 

[gh_mcfc]

Right so does this mean Arsenal are fucked due to the loan thing?

It means no one is fucked as the rules are unlawful- except the PL who potentially may have to fork out compensation

 

[Revolver]

He’s always had a soft spot for us he tells it how it is the premier don’t like that

Yes it appears that way.

He’s no legal expert. But no one really knows for sure what’s going on with these rulings and how it will pan out. And you just can’t trust the media with our club.

I just can’t think of anyone apart from Samuel in the media who has really stuck up for us.

(But this is probably more apt for the “media” thread)

 

[GLBlue1995]

I've explained above. This was a big win for the PL. It effectively said APT was legitimate (and necessary) if constructed correctly. The Tribunal also rejected things like this "We do not, however, find that the APT Rules were targeted specifically at clubs owned by companies in the Gulf region but were rather intended to apply to any clubthat might use APTs."View attachment 146761

The litigator in me focused on one phrase in your response: "If constructed correctly"

I get that the initial ruling didn't strike down APT rules as illegal per se. But with the ruling that the pre-2024 rules were null and void, isn't there the possibility that they either (1) can't be constructed correctly; or (2) that to be constructed correctly, they'll be so watered down as to be largely irrelevant? Im my experience as a litigator and a former US Court of Appeals clerk, courts/tribunals often avoid making sweeping decisions when a more surgical, more easily supportable and less controversial decision gets them to the same point. Is there any chance that's happening here?

I'm not an expert on these rulings -- I've not spent the time with them you have, so hopefully this is taken as the good faith question it is.

Thanks for all your hard work and patience educating us all about these rulings.

 

[ArniArason]

BBC's story doing all it can to try and side with the premier league