PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[slbsn]

So again from a novice perspective arent they therefore alleging fraud and false accounting on our behalf which would be a criminal offence?

Yes it could be if ever pursued in a criminal context but it hasn’t been to date. Cases like this do get investigated by organisations like the Serious Fraud Office and the SEC/DOJ in the US. A good example is Autonomy which has had a lot of coverage recently https://www.cio.com/article/304397/the-hp-autonomy-lawsuit-timeline-of-an-ma-disaster.html?amp=1

 

[mancboy]

Yes it could be if ever pursued in a criminal context but it hasn’t been to date. Cases like this do get investigated by organisations like the Serious Fraud Office and the SEC/DOJ in the US. A good example is Autonomy which has had a lot of coverage recently https://www.cio.com/article/304397/the-hp-autonomy-lawsuit-timeline-of-an-ma-disaster.html?amp=1

If they had the relevant evidence is there any reason they wouldnt present it to the SFO or FCA or is the evidentiary standard different when it comes to those bodies?

 

[slbsn]

If they had the relevant evidence is there any reason they wouldnt present it to the SFO or FCA or is the evidentiary standard different when it comes to those bodies?

FCA not relevant here. But SFO charge in the criminal courts so the decision for them is a two-stage test to determine whether to prosecute a case:

1. Evidential Stage Test: is there sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction from a jury on a “beyond reasonable doubt” standard;
2. Public Interest Stage Test: If the evidential stage is met, the SFO then considers whether a prosecution is in the public interest.

 

[mancboy]

FCA not relevant here. But SFO charge in the criminal courts so the decision for them is a two-stage test to determine whether to prosecute a case:

1. Evidential Stage Test: is there sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction from a jury on a “beyond reasonable doubt” standard;
2. Public Interest Stage Test: If the evidential stage is met, the SFO then considers whether a prosecution is in the public interest.

If it were to go the wrong way would questions be asked as to why the evidence accepted by the pl panel was not enough to be accepted in a criminal court or are the standards different?

 

[slbsn]

If it were to go the wrong way would questions be asked as to why the evidence accepted by the pl panel was not enough to be accepted in a criminal court or are the standards different?

Other way round. PL is balance of probabilities, SFO etc is beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[richards30]

Other way round. PL is balance of probabilities, SFO etc is beyond reasonable doubt.

Hey Stefan, well done for all you do in the media but any chance you could call Simon Jordan an arrogant wanker next time you are on Talksport please? ;-)

 

[Newman Noggs]

FCA not relevant here. But SFO charge in the criminal courts so the decision for them is a two-stage test to determine whether to prosecute a case:

1. Evidential Stage Test: is there sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction from a jury on a “beyond reasonable doubt” standard;
2. Public Interest Stage Test: If the evidential stage is met, the SFO then considers whether a prosecution is in the public interest.

As you know, given the number of referrals the SFO receives, there is an initial "vetting" stage where a decision is made whether to investigate at all. Considerations would include the nature of the "victims" and whether an alternative remedy such as civil action is available which, in this case there is. Another factor is '"staleness".

I'd suggest that, if the SFO were minded to exercise its considerable powers in this case, it would have done so before now and we'd know about it.

 

[Centurions]

Hey Stefan, well done for all you do in the media but any chance you could call Simon Jordan an arrogant wanker on your last & final appearance on Talksport please? ;-)

Corrected ;)

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Hey Stefan, well done for all you do in the media but any chance you could call Simon Jordan an arrogant wanker next time you are on Talksport please? ;-)

And strangle Jim White with his yellow tie.

 

[Truesilverblue]

Wenger believes City are not guilty of anything of a serious nature and at the most expects a fine only maybe a few points deducted if they are indeed found guilty if anything. The red cartel want be too pleased about that