A couple of additional points, all imho:
The club says it has co-operated, but the PL says the club hasn't. So, clearly there is a difference between what the PL wanted and what the club provided. I am tending to go with the club that, after the court decision, they provided everything they had to. That implies to me that they didn't provide all the third party evidence that scuppered the UEFA case (because the PL has no right to require information from third parties - note the PL changed the rule on providing third party information during the investigation), leaving the PL in a quandary. Do they close the investigation due to a lack of evidence, or continue knowing (from CAS) the sort of counter-evidence that the club will provide to the panel.
They choose to continue. Why? Who knows. Pressure to drag the process out? Sheer cussedness? A professional responsibility to get the bottom of everything.
I have said before. If this is what has happened, the club has played a blinder and the PL has no winning strategy.