Here's a thought:

[Franny Lee's Barrel Chest]

As you've probably read on either here or the official site, the club are sueing The Sun for fabricating the story about the watches being given to the players.

So it got me thinking. Technically, you buy a newspaper so you can read news. I daresay that you could expect the news to be correct, and be informative. Therefore, if you then find out that said news is completely made up, like that story was, surely, under the sale of goods act, or the trade descriptions act, you could take your paper back and get your money back?

Unless, of course you get The Sun just for the tits.

 

[NPBlue]

Under the sale of goods act, how can you market the sun as a newspaper?

I would'nt wrap my dead dog in that torrid rag.

 

[michaelo]

But i assumed it must be true?



After all it is the sun ;)

 

[bananamilksheikh]

they have a disclaimer about the accuracy of information

to sue you must incur a "loss" ie. loss of money or reputation etc. Damages are paid if proven.

So City will be claiming for tarnishing the Sheik's image re: excessive gifts and possibly the players will claim as it was implied a taxable benefit was received. It could easily be seen as a tax fiddle by the inland Revenue.