PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[eastmanc]

I think that UEFA looked at it, as part of their original investigation after Der Spiegel published it. But once CAS decided what the relevant cut-off date was, I doubt it was examined as part of that hearing. Some of it would have been earlier Etihad payments. so there should be no issue there. Another time-barred sponsorship was one from Etisalat, where Der Spiegel showed this had apparently been paid by ADUG iirc. But we know how selective DS were and I definitely recall seeing something about Etisalat later repaying ADUG.

Wasn't there an issue with emails being cobbled together for different years.

 

[Leeky]

what law firm do these work for, miracle workers

 

[route46]

Thought it was irrelevant if sheikh Mansour funded the sponsor deals as long as they were deemed fair value

 

[Len Rum]

I hope it is. Letermes comments yesterday point towards this, imo. He said they had hard evidence against City, which I presume is the Etisalat time barrings.

Not sure how relevant the Etisalat sponsorship will be given that it was about ten to thirteen years ago.
Was the sponsorship amount was ever disclosed?
Also my recollection is that the payments were in accordance with the rules.

 

[De Souza]

what law firm do these work for, miracle workers

I think they’re both dead now.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

OK. Excuse me for taking up your time as your clearly more intelligent & knowledgeable than me in this stuff. But if he did... he can...so what's the issue? The amount?

If he was the business owner, then it could potentially be a related party transaction and subject to the market value test that would have been applicable under FFP at the time. I don't think it was for a huge amount so I'm not too bothered about that side of things.

I can't remember the exact dates of that arrangement but it might have been just before FFP came in (so no rules against it other than a general requirement to declare any Related Party transactions.) We didn't declare it so clearly thought it wasn't an RPT. It's possible that FFP came in and we felt that it was a problem, and Etisalat therefore reimbursed ADUG.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I hope it is. Letermes comments yesterday point towards this, imo. He said they had hard evidence against City, which I presume is the Etisalat time barrings.

Leterme's 'hard evidence' didn't really come to much did it?

 

[Lord Blue]

I fuckin love this man more than everView attachment 68543

if ever there was a future city manager in the making

 

[Colin Bell (genuine name)]

Maybe the PL should have instructed someone to read the Bluemoon forum. They could have saved a lot of time and decided “Fuck it, what’s the point.”

One thing I know about lawyers is that they will tell you what you want to hear especially if there is a chance they can make a lot of money. Bird and Bird have strung this along for 4 years and despite everything that went on at CAS they have told the PL they have a case. Admittedly the PL have not been helped by pressure from the red tops.

Not worried in the slightest

 

[laserblue]

Wasn't there an issue with emails being cobbled together for different years.

Out of the millions of emails hacked Der Spiegel highlighted seven. Five were cynically taken out of context and the other two were spliced together with malicious intent to change their meaning and significance completely. At CAS UEFA's 'evidence' consisted of photocopies of Der Spiegel's articles on the subject.

Hence CAS's mention of 'no evidence' no fewer than 11 times in their summary judgement.