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

Whatever they propose - they have still got to deal with the current irregularities. So they HAVE to pass changes to the rules that affected the “gulf” states. If the clubs with loans don’t have to pay interest then APTs are null & void. If they are not backdated, then all APTs prior to the new rules will be revoked & as we were badly affected, compensation will be sought (if it’s not already). Either way, the PL have got a huge mess to sort out.

Whatever the proposals they suggest, the reds will find it hard to vote.

Is my take on this correct???
Sincerely hope you're right Blue.
 
There are also two other clauses that say they are unlawful:

“(i) that the APT Rules are unlawful on account of being in breach of sections 2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 because they exclude from their scope shareholder loans and for no other reason;
(ii) that the Amended APT Rules are unlawful on account of being in breach of sections 2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 as they exclude from their scope shareholder loans and because of the pricing changes in Appendix 18 of the Amended APT Rules and for no other reason;
(iii) that APT Rules and the Amended APT Rules are unlawful on account of being procedurally unfair because a club is unable to comment upon the comparable transaction data relied upon by the PL before the PL determines whether a transaction is not at FMV and for no other reason;”

The “and for no other reason” statement must be legalese because it gives two other reasons.
I have quickly read the whole judgement. I came away with the impression that the tribunal were over sympathetic to the PL in some areas such as the use of Nielsen alone, and their view that there was no bias. I think that is not the end of those matters and while the decisions of the tribunal are binding, there is nothing to stop City arguing about their application if the club is in dispute with the PL over future APTs. I am still not clear over how the PL decide that a transaction is Associated. It seems to me the PL take the view that Mansour is so influential that ALL AbuDhabi companies constitute an Association. Can anybody give an example of how Mansour has influenced a company of which he is not a director or officer?
I think I’ve read (presumably on here) that City’s sponsorship from Hays was reciprocal to some exclusivity they were given in an Abu Dhabi contract and Nexen may similarly arise from links via F1. Can’t personally vouch for the accuracy of that - but it seems feasible and that how business gets done. Given Mansour’s and Khaldoon’s position and status in Abu Dhabi, they will have considerable heft with AD Companies and also those doing serious business there - not to mention aspirants and new entrants hoping to grow business in AD. The cartel at the PL recognise that, but somehow stopping it is no easy task. The horse has bolted.
 

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.