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

jrb said:
View attachment 134340

In the message, seen by Mail Sport, City’s general counsel Simon Cliff says bluntly: ‘regrettably the (league’s) summary is misleading and contains several inaccuracies’.

‘Of even greater concern,’ Cliff adds, ‘is the Premier League’s suggestion that new APT rules should be passed within the next 10 days.

'When the Premier League consulted on and proposed the original APT Rules in late 2021, we pointed out that the process (which took several weeks) was rushed, ill-thought-out and would result in rules that were anti-competitive. The recent Award has validated those concerns entirely.’

Cliff informs clubs that the panel found APT rules, aimed at preventing clubs from agreeing inflated deals with companies linked to their owners, unlawful and that, contrary to the top-flight’s comments, the decision renders all of the rules ‘null and void’.

‘In recent correspondence,’ Cliff writes, ‘the Premier League agreed with MCFC that this is an issue which will need to be resolved by the Tribunal. It is therefore remarkable that the Premier League is now seeking to involve the member clubs in a process to amend the APT Rules at a time when it does not even know the status of those rules’.

It is understood that City have already received ‘multiple’ responses in support of the email from other clubs.
Click to expand...

Who would have thought that the premier league, who's strings we all know are being pulled by clubs who not only hate us, but have the moral compass of a rattlesnake, would fucking lie again. Aided and abetted of course by the morally corrupt racist media led by that bastion of virtue the BBC. Gloves off City the time for playing nice is over. Keep gathering all the evidence and sue, sue, sue. No mercy until every single one of these cockroaches are crushed.
 
ManCitizens. said:
I also wonder if our approach here could suggest things are going well in the current hearing? I’m no expert but is this another way of keeping the Premier Leagues legal team very busy during the 115 hearing?
Click to expand...
Nah, we will be smashing them all over the park in the 115 too, flexing our muscle when the time is right, and that time is now.
 
JASR said:
Yeah this is the red flag of all red flags from KFA’s.

If we had the ability to bribe our way out of it, then why didn’t we bribe to not have the rules in the 1st place, or even have rules that assist just us.
Why would we only bribe at the final stage of a process that sees the clubs reputation dragged through the mud for years/decade.

It makes no sense… which is the point. If anyone states that, their views can be ignored as insane and ungrounded in reality.
Click to expand...
…..and if we are bribing the tribunal and virtually everyone else then why do we need to spend squillions on a top flight legal team when a bunch of ambulance chasers who advertise on talkshit would do the job on an already ‘won’ case?
 
johnny crossan said:
Stefan has just thrown us under a bus - judgement 'not significant' and it's left to Lord Jaw Jaw to point out the obvious. Really disappointed with this lad.
Click to expand...
He’s a lawyer & they never put their arse into the wind. Everything and anything is possible in law that’s how it works for them
 
tweety said:
Listening to Talkshite and as much as I respect Stefan's opinions I think his sit on the fence opinion today isn't useful.
Click to expand...
He doing his best to be balanced so they don't throw back at him he's a blue.

Unlike their southern rag chief football correspondent and the blonde Scottish woman spitting feathers this morning.
 
Really_here said:
from the BBC

'Concerns that clubs could be hit with additional costs'​

BBC News sports editor Dan Roan
Both sides are claiming victory, and in truth the judgement contains something for both City and the Premier League.
League sources are emphasising the fact that most of City's challenges to the APT rules failed, and that the wider system was endorsed by the panel.
They also seem confident that the rules will be swiftly amended by the clubs within two weeks in order to make them lawful.
But the panel's ruling that the exclusion from the rules of interest-free loans from owners to their clubs (shareholder loans) was unlawful, has led to concerns that clubs could now be hit with additional costs that they were not anticipating.
This could mean some are in danger of breaching PSR regulations. The suggestion is that such loans will now be subject to commercial market rates of interest.
That could have major ramifications for those clubs that owe tens (or even hundreds) of millions of pounds to their owners.
The Premier League seems relatively relaxed about that issue, along with speculation that City and other clubs could seek compensation for any losses suffered by the rules.
On shareholder loans, league officials believe a fair market value analysis of such borrowings would be placed on the cost of the loan (i.e. the interest rate), not the value of the loan itself, and that the impact on clubs, therefore, would be minimal.
They also feel that such loans will only come into the scope of APT once the rules are amended, and will not be applied retrospectively, so only future loans will be affected.
However, BBC Sport has learned that City’s lawyers believe that not subjecting previous shareholder loans to a Fair Market Value assessment (while continuing to apply it to previous sponsorship deals) would be unfair, and that they may seek an injunction to prevent the Premier League from doing so.
But there will be fears from some in the game that any weakening of APT rules designed to preserve fairness and competitive balance could lead to certain clubs being able to sign more lucrative commercial deals.
There is also the question over whether this could have an impact on the 100-plus charges the league has brought against City for alleged financial rule breaches. City deny wrongdoing, and a hearing into the case continues.
Whatever the consequences, what is clear is that this dispute has reinforced the sense of division among the clubs over the financial regulations they are subject to.
Click to expand...

Well, fuck me. An injunction to stop the PL making interest free shareholder loans only interest bearing pro-actively? The club isn't planning to mess around.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.