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

Probably pedantry but I think only City can "win" in this case because we brought the action and the PL has already implemented its rules. The best the PL can hope for is not to "lose". So, if we have any success at all we've "won" the case.

As far as I'm concerned, if the PL don't lose, they'll have got off with it on a technicality.
 
I'm a bit bored of speculating when we have very little to go on, but it's difficult not to.

As regards requiring third party information, for me, it's not so much that they have attempted to award themselves the powers but that they can then punish the subject of the investigation if the third party tells them to f-off which they are perfectly entitled to do. That is one draconian power they want there that even a government would baulk at.

As regards it not being "meaty", I reckon the ramifications as regards cooperation could be pretty far reaching. All very frustrating.

Right on all counts.

Not sure about the importance with regard to non-cooperation with the 115, though. The wording of the rules on non-cooperation are pretty clear: external information "when able to do so". The question for the 115 is whether the club were "able to do so", I think.

For the APT rules, I think the questions are, firstly, if the PL has the right to impose on the club and the associated party the requirement to provide a statement of fair value and, secondly, whether the PL has the right to draw negative implications from a club's inability to get such a confirmation. Neither of which are competition law issues, I think. Or maybe they are and this is all bullshit :)
 
Presumably he's referring to this article:-


Although it only says it's "imminent" (yes, really).

It does name the 3 judges which I don't think I've seen previously but then I've been busy as the wife had a couple of mini strokes. I'm only on here as a sort of time out :(

"The Lawyer website has reported that the independent panel involved in the APT arbitration is made up of three of the most experienced and respected judges in the country. The three tribunal members are all retired senior judges: Sir Nigel Teare, Lord John Dyson KC and Christopher Vajda KC.
Lord Dyson, a former Master of the Rolls, is also a former Justice of the Supreme Court and over the past five years has sat on the appeal tribunals for Sheffield Wednesday, Derby County and Nottingham Forest’s PSR cases."
Lord Dyson , master of the rolls

 
Reputation is absolutely critical to the overwhelming majority of these people. It’s the currency they trade In and off.
To dismiss it lightly is very silly imho.
That is a good point, that fails on our UEFA charge, it also fails with our first UEFA charge, being seen to have the letters after the name is the reputation, getting the job done to the standard who ever pays, i would put as being more important to those that pay.
 

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.