PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Fuzzy80 said:
Thanks as always.

I was coming on here to ask that question as it is pretty huge.

So what you are saying is City will in a way raise the bar of the charges, as to raise the proof needed.

In other words take it away from balance of probabilities to beyond reasonable doubt (or is that just criminal).
Click to expand...
No it is still balance of probabilities. But the evidence needs to be "more cogent"

Explained here https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/proving-fraud-english-courts-higher-standard
 
projectriver said:
I don't agree with that at all. And there is no High Court route. The only appeal is another PL Panel. So lets hope I am right!
Click to expand...
Indeed, it appears that there is a lot of misinformation swirling around about the potential path of proceedings…

As you rightly say, any appeal of the first PL panel ruling goes to a ‘fresh’ PL panel for a final hearing.

No High Court, no Supreme Court, hence City’s pointed statement of needing an ‘impartial’ panel
 
projectriver said:
I don't agree with that at all. And there is no High Court route. The only appeal is another PL Panel. So lets hope I am right!
Click to expand...
So we are being zipped up backwards basically because we can’t take ‘em to court, it’ll just be another PL panel that will back up the previous PL Panel who backed up the PL in the first place.
It’s a case of it’s their ball and we’re not allowed to play with it any more are we.
This just proves how corrupt football is in this country, the PL are here to safe the day for the historic w4nkers, who just happen to have new money/owners ready to come in, but that will be fully acceptable obviously.
 
Pingu the Penguin said:
Yea let’s hope so! But, I find it inconceivable, largely for the reasons you state, that there’s no way to get this case into the mainstream legal system if it doesn’t go our way.. The stakes are high and the quality of our legal team will create an angle. If nothing else it is contrary to the rules of natural justice

All that said I am conscious when people know stuff enter than me, so not doubting you
Click to expand...
Honestly I don't see any way these allegations are heard in the High Court - skirmishes perhaps but not the main event. We are stuck with the PL rules I think. But I think there is a good chance this makes it harder not easier for the PL to find against us. But that is quite a big guess.
 
projectriver said:
Honestly I don't see any way these allegations are heard in the High Court - skirmishes perhaps but not the main event. We are stuck with the PL rules I think. But I think there is a good chance this makes it harder not easier for the PL to find against us. But that is quite a big guess.
Click to expand...
Any which way the lawyers will be happy :)
 
So, "dishonest concealment" rather than falsifying accounts. So many terms where the explanations all sound very similar in my view. Well, as long as we can settle on what it is, we are getting somewhere.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
That's all well and good and DS reporting is the lowest of the low. But it's the documents that will be looked at and the Mancini docs are comprehensive:


FWIW these can't be a big problem because the numbers are so small in the context of the big picture.
Click to expand...
No idea if they’re fake, maybe they’re real, but with der Speigels track record, would anyone be surprised if these were doctored?

One thing which has occurred to me is that this was all pre FFP, so what would the benefit be of him being paid by City through another channel & what rule does it breach? Can anyone explain that for me please because I really don’t get it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.