gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
No need to apologise for not agreeing on a forum!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
Manc in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2008
- Messages
- 8,520
Going against the advice of a silk only tends to happen when emotion and sentiment overcome logic and reason. It’s a conscious decision to ignore the express legal opinion of someone you are paying huge sums of money to advise you. There has to be a much wider underlying motive to act in this way. No other logical conclusion can be drawn.
It also further underlines the PL’s fundamental gross incompetence.
Arrogance too. I have been around senior management enough to know that most of them think they are the most intelligent people in the room. After all, most seem to believe they got to their lofty position as they always know best.
HelloCity
Well-Known Member
Have you read all of the judgment. Be honest.
The end result was pretty much as I expected - main principles upheld and some meaningful but not necessarily decisive wins. Like it or not that is my objective view. You don’t need to agree but it is based on reading what was said not simply my life long football bias.
And even if you don’t agree it doesn’t change that challenges like this are very hard to win which was a point you seem to also disagree with
Still awaiting your comments? Would be good to have your view on this:
From City’s letter (BBC extract)…
"Regrettably, the summary is misleading and contains several inaccuracies," Cliff claims.
"The tribunal has declared the APT rules to be unlawful. MCFC's position is that this means that all of the APT rules are void," the letter states.
"The decision does not contain an 'endorsement' of the APT Rules, nor does it state that the APT Rules, as enacted, were 'necessary' in order to ensure the efficacy of the League’s financial controls."
The Premier League's position that City were unsuccessful in the majority of its challenge is described by Cliff as "a peculiar way of looking at the decision".
He added: "While it is true that MCFC did not succeed with every point that it ran in its legal challenge, the club did not need to prove that the APT rules are unlawful for lots of different reasons. It is enough that they are unlawful for one reason."
Cliff added that it was “not correct that the tribunal’s decision identifies 'certain discrete elements' of the APT rules that need to be amended in order to comply with competition and public law requirements.
"On the contrary: the APT Rules... have been found to be unlawful, as a matter of competition law and public law.
Now he as the info, the clubs lawyers are saying all the rules are null and void. Stefan goes on national radio and call it a score draw.To be fair to him, He actually said it would be very difficult to prove with the limited info he had at the time. More info is now out but he didnt have access to that at the time of his original comments…
St.Pauli support
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 5,182
PL might also have to exchange their complete legal team as they have advised rules contradicting current UK law. That has been done on purpose.So City didnt lose this one and are already questioning the PLs response as inaccurate.
Chess wise its close to check mate and the PL will certainly need new leaders asap with Masters first to go.
That alone is a scandal and that's why even cartel loving media can impossibly hold up their flag anymore and have to change position (under some pains).
I have answered aboveStill awaiting your comments? Would be good to have your view on this:
From City’s letter…
The Premier League's position that City were unsuccessful in the majority of its challenge is described by Cliff as "a peculiar way of looking at the decision".
He added: "While it is true that MCFC did not succeed with every point that it ran in its legal challenge, the club did not need to prove that the APT rules are unlawful for lots of different reasons. It is enough that they are unlawful for one reason."
Cliff added that it was “not correct that the tribunal’s decision identifies 'certain discrete elements' of the APT rules that need to be amended in order to comply with competition and public law requirements.
"On the contrary: the APT Rules... have been found to be unlawful, as a matter of competition law and public law.
I have read it. Have you?Read the verdict, in what universe have the EPL won?
They have successfully defended many points. They will consider that a significant win.
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2009
- Messages
- 15,025
Are you also certain that the changes necessary can be implemented by the PL in the next 10 days. Presumably yes if they are minor and they have won?I’ve read it. I’ve spent most of the last 10 years in litigation (claimant and defendant). This bad tempered fundamental disagreement is normal. It’s genuinely held but it’s also inherently one sided. That’s not a criticism- it’s a fact. I can be certain that the PL really also believe they won.