City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[Stephenhakin]

Uefa are talking bollocks, the case hasn't been thrown out, it's yet to be heard. A preliminary judgement was rejected. That's equivalent to a murder trial being put back and the defendants lawyer celebrating his client's acquittal.

Thanks mate. THought it weird how only the Guardian has reported on it.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Uefa are talking bollocks, the case hasn't been thrown out, it's yet to be heard. A preliminary judgement was rejected. That's equivalent to a murder trial being put back and the defendants lawyer celebrating his client's acquittal.

I'm not sure that's the case (but I'm no lawyer). My understanding is that the Belgian Court of First Instance referred the case to the ECJ as it felt it wasn't competent to judge on whether the FFP regulations were contrary to Article 101. This request for a preliminary judgement is common where national courts within the EU want a view from the ECJ.

So effectively they ask the ECJ for a ruling. We've only got UEFA's statement so far but it seems that the ECJ has indicated to the BCFI that it believes there is no breach of Article 101 and they (the BCFI) will use that ruling in deciding the case.

They would need serious reasons to overturn that ruling, is my understanding but I'll wait to see what Dupont says.

 

[George Hannah]

I note your note of caution here PB.

 

[Stephenhakin]

Cheers mate....any legal bods know for sure??? And why are only the Guardian reporting it? Thought this would be mega news?

 

[aguero93:20]

I'm not sure that's the case (but I'm no lawyer). My understanding is that the Belgian Court of First Instance referred the case to the ECJ as it felt it wasn't competent to judge on whether the FFP regulations were contrary to Article 101. This request for a preliminary judgement is common where national courts within the EU want a view from the ECJ.

So effectively they ask the ECJ for a ruling. We've only got UEFA's statement so far but it seems that the ECJ has indicated to the BCFI that it believes there is no breach of Article 101 and they (the BCFI) will use that ruling in deciding the case.

They would need serious reasons to overturn that ruling, is my understanding but I'll wait to see what Dupont says.

I understood that it was the preliminary ruling on restricting UEFA from moving to the -€30m deficit as that was the more immediate matter under decision.

 

[aguero93:20]

Without reading beyond this thread, it seems that the Belgian court has essentially attempted to impose a remedy on a court above and is thus acting ultra vires.

In any event, the European Court [ECJ?] will doubtless have decided that it needs to consider all the evidence before the final determination is made and then consider, if FFP effectively 'loses', what the appropriate remedy should be.

In English, the Belgium court can't tell the EU court what the punishment is before the EU court has made a decision after hearing both sides of the story.

I may be wrong as I have not read anything about it, of course.

I'll go with this for the moment, although Dupont has been uncharacteristically quiet.

 

[SilverFox2]

I'm sure that ADUG will watch the developments with interest in much the same way as the other profitable clubs.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I understood that it was the preliminary ruling on restricting UEFA from moving to the -€30m deficit as that was the more immediate matter under decision.

It's not clear but my reading of the UEFA statement suggests it's more than that. Hence why I want to see the judgement itself and hear what Dupont has to say.

 

[aguero93:20]

It's not clear but my reading of the UEFA statement suggests it's more than that.

Yeah I'll wait to hear the judgement too but don't forget how they press managed the EC decision.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

it's nothing to worry about it's not passing judgement on the case at all.

“This order has a purely procedural scope and does not prejudge the debate on the substantive questions concerning the legality of FFP,” said Dupont.

http://www.cityam.com/220741/bullish-uefa-declares-victory-legal-fight-over-ffp-future