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

[halfcenturyup]

Did anything come of the challenge we made in relation to the “14 votes is enough” rule?

That was never a claim to be considered, I don't think. Not surprisingly. At least, it's not mentioned in the 175 pages of documented reasoning.

 

[arbabarshad]

OK. We will see soon enough.

The way APT rules are unlawful due to shareholder loan exclusions, would the same apply to PSR and FFP and all those historic rules will be null and void ? We might not have challenged those rules in the APT case but this sets the precedent i guess and City can challenge the unlawful nature of PSR and FFP as well (unless they did include the shareholder loans provisions in PSR & FFP?).

 

[WRicko]

OK. We will see soon enough.

Are you going to elaborate ?

 

[halfcenturyup]

The way APT rules are unlawful due to shareholder loan exclusions, would the same apply to PSR and FFP and all those historic rules will be null and void ? We might not have challenged those rules in the APT case but this sets the precedent i guess and City can challenge the unlawful nature of PSR and FFP as well (unless they did include the shareholder loans provisions in PSR & FFP?).

Well, that's the question, isn't it? There is a fair way to go until we know the outcome of the APT case, so let's wait for that, then see what it means tor FFP/PSR, if anything.

Intriguing possibility, though. Enough to get Masters out of a golf event with his broadcast partners, I'm sure ..... :)

 

[Gone for a Burton]

This is completely true. I'm a total layman in relation to all this, but I do know that once something is deemed unlawful it can take a very long time to create and apply a suitable remedy.

Now is the time & opportunity to investigate and expose all the malfeasance of the PL & activities of other clubs and their owners and executives.

It should be mandatory in view of the PL operating un lawful, discriminatory and unfair structures.

Nothing should be off the tabe.....expose expose expose !!

 

[halfcenturyup]

Are you going to elaborate ?

I don't think I can explain it better than the extract I attached last time.

 

[arbabarshad]

Well, that's the question, isn't it? There is a fair way to go until we know the outcome of the APT case, so let's wait for that, then see what it means tor FFP/PSR, if anything.

Intriguing possibility, though. Enough to get Masters out of a golf event with his broadcast partners, I'm sure ..... :)

Reading Simon cliffs letter published re: apt case, it read like:

A) as there was an unlawful clause in the rules, the rules cannot be applied in current form and should be null And void.

B) if the PL insisted on applying the rules with a revised clause (lawful and voted in favour by PL members) on shareholder loans, they’ll have to include the shareholder loans provisions retrospectively which would be detrimental to a number of member clubs.

So it’s a rock and hard place for PL whichever way they go.

The only door city have left open for the PL is to null and void historical rules and start a fresh with lawful rules going forward including shareholder loans. Even then, there will be claims against PL by the clubs who have had decisions against them on FFP/PSR basis. And those claims might be from clubs who are no longer members (relegated) and wouldn’t care a jot on how it impacts premier league today.

The other door open is to guy the PL and start a new league which in itself will be a nightmare as there maybe one faction who want to go one way and another faction looking to go another way.

Unless PL leadership changes and new leadership / regulator withdraws the charges and keep the status quo going as if nothing happened which seems impossible too at this stage due to number of aggrieved parties or member clubs.

In short it looks PL have committed a suicide.

 

[kaz7]

Did sky mention we won this case ? Damn sure they would have if we lost

 

[halfcenturyup]

Reading Simon cliffs letter published re: apt case, it read like:

A) as there was an unlawful clause in the rules, the rules cannot be applied in current form and should be null And void.

B) if the PL insisted on applying the rules with a revised clause (lawful and voted in favour by PL members) on shareholder loans, they’ll have to include the shareholder loans provisions retrospectively which would be detrimental to a number of member clubs.

So it’s a rock and hard place for PL whichever way they go.

The only door city have left open for the PL is to null and void historical rules and start a fresh with lawful rules going forward including shareholder loans. Even then, there will be claims against PL by the clubs who have had decisions against them on FFP/PSR basis. And those claims might be from clubs who are no longer members (relegated) and wouldn’t care a jot on how it impacts premier league today.

The other door open is to guy the PL and start a new league which in itself will be a nightmare as there maybe one faction who want to go one way and another faction looking to go another way.

Unless PL leadership changes and new leadership / regulator withdraws the charges and keep the status quo going as if nothing happened which seems impossible too at this stage due to number of aggrieved parties or member clubs.

In short it looks PL have committed a suicide.

Whatever happens, it will be an interesting couple of weeks, I think.

 

[WRicko]

I don't think I can explain it better than the extract I attached last time.

Well your the one making a claim that goes beyond what has been debate at tribunal by the most recent qualified people in the field