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

[Paladin]

. Not an original thought but it looks as though the PL threw the kitchen sink accusation at us to busy our legal team while they worked on tightening up the APT etc.
They were using attrition on APT one to vote through much more biased rules using the aero interest allowance to win the slow but sure votes they needed.

Sorry if everyone knows this but it does seem 115 is a deliberate workload of nothings to take City's eye off the ball with the APT one.

The 115 charges came well before City lodged charges against the PL in respect of APT though. For me, the motivation for the 115 charges was a show of strength by the PL, designed to humiliate City, and probably heavily supported by our enemies.

 

[dadnlad]

No, interest from 22 Nov 24

still ouch though

 

[dadnlad]

Now ......just imagine for a minute if we hadn't come along.

That picture of the red yank cartel in a restaurant in New York will remain with me forever and ever !!

there'd be no rules

 

[slbsn]

If the PSR results for 2022/23 and 2023/24 aren't restated for interest on shareholder loans in the 2024/25 and 2025/26 assessments, isn't @Maly right that some clubs will still receive an unlawful benefit for 2022 to 2024 in the three year assessments going forward until 2025/26 (as well as for previous years historically)?

Edit: That's the problem for me with these new rules. They are cementing in place unlawful treatments for a period of time. I always thought that ignorance was no defence when it came to law. It's unfortunate for some clubs but surely corrective action is needed?

Benefit yes. Unlawful benefit not sure. I’m not sure how the law would work in this situation. Fairness dictates no retrospective punishment in my view (not a legal view per se more what is objectively equitable in my opinion). But as I have said I think the mitigation would save any punished clubs

 

[SilverFox2]

The 115 charges came well before City lodged charges against the PL in respect of APT though. For me, the motivation for the 115 charges was a show of strength by the PL, designed to humiliate City, and probably heavily supported by our enemies.

Perhaps I should stick to enjoying my retirement rather than embarking on a journalistic career.
Point taken.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

The 115 charges came well before City lodged charges against the PL in respect of APT though. For me, the motivation for the 115 charges was a show of strength by the PL, designed to humiliate City, and probably heavily supported by our enemies.

115 ,268, 369,1476.

UEFA,FA,PL,VAR,Pgmol, The League of the fucking cross.

rags,dippers,arse,spuds,the hateful eight,eighteen,twohundred and seventy six and fucking more.

Put any number on it and they have been trying for 15 years to DESTROY our club to maintain to red cabal status quo.

City are the ONLY club to challenge them.

We done it on the pitch and we'll do it in the courts if necessary.

Khaldoon said "Once and for all".

That'll do for me.

Burn them City,fucking burn them !!

 

[Silva2021]

My take on this.

City handled the changes well despite the outcry (we advised it was unlawful, followed through and ended up being right.

It seems clear that PL changed the rules knowing they were unlawful or could be unlawful.

Since the judgment again our conduct has been reasonable. The way PL has acted will be judged soon. Now they may have acted quickly to close a gap and if they have then you can understand why they would have. Now it depends on your advice and a bit of luck (no advice is going to be guaranteed to be right as legislation does have an element of unpredictability especially if there is no framework).

If it proves that the changes they make is correct once the judgment has come out, then we have to accept it and I believe the club will too.