PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[KS55]

It may be it may not be. The issues differ from case to case so the constitution of the tribunal will differ also. In a case like this which is likely to involve a heavy legal component I would expect 3 KCs. Everton’s case was not so heavy on the law, so it isn’t surprising that their panel included individuals whose expertise lay in other areas

It’s one KC plus a sunshine band.

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

It may be it may not be. The issues differ from case to case so the constitution of the tribunal will differ also. In a case like this which is likely to involve a heavy legal component I would expect 3 KCs. Everton’s case was not so heavy on the law, so it isn’t surprising that their panel included individuals whose expertise lay in other areas

The PL has maintained all along that the City case is highly complex indeed and is therefore going to require careful consideration and deliberation. Stefan has pointed out that they claim that many of the highest profile businessmen and diplomats in the world, as well as some global companies, have indulged in activities, for over a decade which are criminal, which could ruin their careers, destroy their reputations and possibly lead to their imprisonment. As he points out, this would be a big call - one hell of a call - for the members of the IC to make, and I think they need qualifications and experience in the law which are dazzling rather than spotless. They will not get anything like an easy ride from Lord Pannick. Their decisions will be held up to the most forensic scrutiny, and Prestwich Blue may well be right that the PL are looking for a way out while maintaining that they did their best for the cartel.

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

I would have thought that there may be some reliance on accountancy practices within the alleged breaches that KC's might not specifically be au fait with but maybe that would infer that each party would present their own evidence with testimony from "expert witnesses" in accountancy.

 

[manimanc]

The PL has maintained all along that the City case is highly complex indeed and is therefore going to require careful consideration and deliberation. Stefan has pointed out that they claim that many of the highest profile businessmen and diplomats in the world, as well as some global companies, have indulged in activities which are criminal, which could ruin their careers, destroy their reputations and possibly lead to their imprisonment. As he points out, this would be a big call - one hell of a call - for the members of the IC to make, and I think they need qualifications and experience in the law which are dazzling rather than spotless. Their decisions will be held up to the most forensic scrutiny, and Prestwich Blue may well be right that the PL are looking for a way out while maintaining that they did their best for the cartel.

Highly complex because they have to go through every document and every sponsorship as masters and the red puppets have come to the conclusion that we couldn't possibly run so professionally and not be on the fiddle.

I'm just wondering if the HMRC and The Fraud Squad will be asking our owners and CEO's any questions as we're being accused of Fraud on a humongous scale.

And Omar Berrada will be grilled surely as he was the main man for sponsorship deals and the like.

I'm sure the press will be all over that as the trial continues.

 

[slbsn]

I would have thought that there may be some reliance on accountancy practices within the alleged breaches that KC's might not specifically be au fait with but maybe that would infer that each party would present their own evidence with testimony from "expert witnesses" in accountancy.

I think they would ideally want 3 KCs with one having a strong accounting skillset (someone like Simon Salzedo KC) but it will depend who is on the long list. I’m sure they will look to appoint the strongest line up possible given the risks

 

[Rory Bluelow]

This is precisely the concern that I have expressed on here before

Despite many excellent posters on here giving lots of good reasons for optimism - including them emphasising the professionalism of KCs means that they will not be blindly biased and risk their reputation - I have not seen an explanation of how/why this happened

I’d guess that UEFA nominee was aware that his two colleagues were voting the other way and therefore could safely show loyalty to UEFA (and get future work from them) and allow them to save a bit of “face”. I recall reading somewhere that majority verdicts are common at CAS.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

If they have global ambitions, they are forced to fund them somehow, but in the short term it looks a bit suicidal. If this is Silver Lake, they are obviously confident.
Is Melbourne still loss making, I wonder. What are the prospects for the Indian club? Can we get inside the good Sheik’s mind?
Don’t forget, the ping pong cheat says City hide their losses in CFG which accounts for CFG’s negative results!

Like that fucker would know anything !

 

[Chris in London]

I think they would ideally want 3 KCs with one having a strong accounting skillset (someone like Simon Salzedo KC) but it will depend who is on the long list. I’m sure they will look to appoint the strongest line up possible given the risks

Is he on the panel?

(The panel of potential appointees, not the actual tribunal)

 

[halfcenturyup]

I would have thought that there may be some reliance on accountancy practices within the alleged breaches that KC's might not specifically be au fait with but maybe that would infer that each party would present their own evidence with testimony from "expert witnesses" in accountancy.

There should always be an accountant on the panel, just to keep all the bloody lawyers straight

 

[Rory Bluelow]

But.............

And I will draw a line under this concern after this post....

Again can posters not see how this just adds to the concern.

Eleven times the CAS panel stated that there was no evidence - yet one of it's members voted against CITY purely because it was the tradition to vote in line with their sponsor

Because by doing so, it didn’t affect the outcome.