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

[Bodicoteblue]

it felt like they’ve decided to call out every thing. It paints the picture of corruption & call it out.

My head is spinning from all the ins and outs and legalese niceties, but one thing I see is that this whole affair, if nothing else, has demonstrated quite clearly that the PL is prepared, despite warnings, to deliberately act unlawfully, and with full knowledge of the consequences of their actions.
This must put their impartiality and their ‘acting in good faith’ into focus, and cannot be ignored when considering anything they say or do.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

There won't be big damages because they don't have big losses. City will simply renegotiate the Etihad deal at lower levels in the later years and get it approved. There was no suggestion that I could see that the Tribunal thought the PLs consideration of the facts presented was faulty - they liked the PL process. They just agreed with City that it should be quicker and City should have some data to try and convince the PL. If City use that data but it is still rejected, what is City's loss? Nil.

And the new rules won't be found to be unlawful by object unless the Tribunal really believes in retrospective action on shareholder loans and the absence of transitional rules. Again, I can't see it.

Last reply

City should still file for damages, however small.

It's a matter of principle !!

 

[halfcenturyup]

No they have to get rid of them by mid Jan or they will apply to all PSR from 24/25s assessment

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?

 

[Keeper!]

I don’t know. He does seem to share some of my big picture perspective these days

Thanks for the reply and it's good to know!

 

[Keeper!]

Yeah strange that. Something Jordan likes to do is be correct in factuality. That allows him to win arguments. So I assume he isnt seeing the bigger picture now, reluctantly. He still hates City with a passion.

Nothing wrong with hating us but the shift in his attitude to the charges and to the APT case has been considerable.

He knows a lot of people in the game and around it, football is a small community , I get the feeling he knows we are going to succeed.

 

[johnny crossan]

Nothing wrong with hating us but the shift in his attitude to the charges and to the APT case has been considerable.

He knows a lot of people in the game and around it, football is a small community , I get the feeling he knows we are going to succeed.

As Khaldoon has pointed out on numerous occasions! City know exactly who has done what in the cartel colours, he has promised there will be a reckoning.

 

[Keeper!]

As Khaldoon has pointed out on numerous occasions! City know exactly who has done what in the cartel colours, he has promised there will be a reckoning.

“Keep your friends close; keep your enemies closer.”

I think Txiki, Ferran and Khaldoon have already had the cartel over a few times already, Ronaldo, Fred, Maguire, Rice etc, something tells me we were been very naughty and very selective with our bidding!

In my experience Arabs are fair and decent people on the whole but if you cross them, beware!

 

[Gone for a Burton]

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?

Ignorance of the law or the arrogance of the majority ??

I may have misread the actions of UEFA, FA, Pgmol, PL, Dippers, Rags etc over many years but they appear to do what they want and are impervious to the laws......and then City come along and start to challenge the biased and unlawful status quo.

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 !!

 

[SilverFox2]

. 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.

 

[BeerIsTheBest]

No, interest from 22 Nov 24

Keep going mate. You’re doing a great job.

What comes after last, last?