City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

[Gundoggin]

That dodgy **** Barber at Brighton getting implicated now the can of worms has been opened.

 

[Pam]

There in lies the problem. Not many fans of other clubs have half a brain

Who cares?

 

[M18CTID]

it's either remove them or come up with a legal solution that's agreeable with the majority. Anything else is asking the PL to be handing cash out in a tribunal again

Exactly. It’s not rocket science. Just come up with some rules that are not unlawful and can be voted on.

 

[Cobwebcat]

The Forest fan is not a happy bunny. Shame.

That’s how you know we won

 

[zandvoort blue]

This screams 'out of court settlement' discussions are currently taking place to me (which is to be expected tbf)? Premier League will want this to go away so will need to play ball, but if not, the panel will decide on damages (and if an injunction against any offensive rules are necessary to strike them from the rulebook).

My guess is City have said they want them if successful (which they were), and the PL said let's talk first...

1. Injunctive relief and damages are also sought. We reserve our jurisdiction to grant such relief. We do not so in this Award because we heard no submissions as to such relief and in any event we consider that the Parties should have the opportunity to consider what, if any, further relief is appropriate in the light of our conclusions.

Everybody should bookmark SCB's post. An out of court settlement with us agreeing not to sue over APT. Whilst admitting guilt over non compliance. PL then declare it as a win, we take a fine.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It will be interesting to see what happens now. If a club like Brighton, for instance, has to take £375m of debt servicing on their books at say 8%, thats £30m a year in debt servicing costs. How can they sustain that ?

Letting owners bankroll clubs at favourable interest rates was clearly unfair when other clubs were having lawful sponsorship denied.

 

[levets]

That's just page 164 of the judgement to clarify!

https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2024/10/07/898efab9-9f51-449b-a393-1a0c05b48824/Manchester-City-and-Premier-League-Partial-Final-Award-071024.pdf

 

[halfcenturyup]

No we challenged the whole thing, it’s the first argument on the full decision.

I think you are missing the point.

City didn't have a problem with the original rules. The club even voted for them in principle and didn't vote against them in 2021. It was the 2023 rules that led to the tribunal.

When it came to making the claim, of course the club aimed high against the original rules as well as the new rules. Why not? You never know. It's the equivalent of the 115 charges. I doubt the club really thought they could throw out all the rules, but they seem to have had success on the new rules they voted against and on the deals that were delayed. Which is a win for the club and a problem for the PL.

The PL can claim that as a victory if they want, but it is hugely embarrassing for them to have their legal opinion, that was paraded around all the clubs, reversed on appeal on any issue at all. And not for the first time.

 

[malg]

Of course they are (BBC). No comments allowed on the article says it all….

Probably a good idea. It'd be a cesspit.

 

[IcriedwhenTueartleft]

I’m going to buy a new Dyson as a thank you :)

Don't , mine just sits in the corner gathering dust