PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

There is a legal argument going on, hence the delay.
The judges decided, and I quote the legal language here:…..”For these reasons the panel finds that Masters is a complete twat.”
Masters has objected to this being published on the grounds that the panel were not asked to adjudicate on his twatiness and that this is ultra vires and thus libellous. So a supernumerary hearing is being held to decide whether on the balance of probabilities Master has been shown to be a twat or not. The definition of “complete” is causing their worships some difficulty. What if he’s only a partial twat?
I know this is true because a man on the Clapham omnibus told me.
See Jarndyce v Jarndyce 2Dickens 1873. 4567.
 
Last edited:
bobbyowenquiff said:
That’s not possible. This first case is just to decide guilt or not guilty. If guilty there will be a separate hearing to consider sanctions.
Click to expand...
I am unable to find any provision within the set arrangements in the PL rules that detail how a second IC will determine the penalty, if one is indeed appropriate but, as we know the claim is that the first IC won’t determine any penalty.
I believe in many / all of the PL cases to date the two parties outline what they believe to be aggravating and indeed mitigating factors even before a verdict is delivered . It may of course be that the IC have already handed its conclusions to the head of disciplinary matters at the PL who has now charged a separate panel to act on the conclusions but one thing I somehow doubt that there will be another hearing as such.
 
terraloon said:
I am unable to find any provision within the set arrangements in the PL rules that detail how a second IC will determine the penalty, if one is indeed appropriate but, as we know the claim is that the first IC won’t determine any penalty.
I believe in many / all of the PL cases to date the two parties outline what they believe to be aggravating and indeed mitigating factors even before a verdict is delivered . It may of course be that the IC have already handed its conclusions to the head of disciplinary matters at the PL who has now charged a separate panel to act on the conclusions but one thing I somehow doubt that there will be another hearing as such.
Click to expand...
I can't be bothered to dig it out but I am pretty sure it has been stated publically by the PL that there will be a separate decision for any penalty at a later date. The impact of a guilty decision on the main allegations would be huge. It would impact on other clubs, sponsors, etc. It would be lunacy to impose a sanction without input from other member clubs. City would challenge the decision legally as well. A further complication would be the imminent arrival of an Independent Regulator. If City were relegated for example the Football League Clubs would have to be consulted.
 
mancboy said:
I will repeat this till i am blue in the face, the time taken has absolutely zero bearing on the nature of the decision, there is 115 charges all of which have to be explained and documented in a watertight fashion and the panel have to give absolute legal reasoning as to why they have come to the reasoning that they did, this document will run into 1000s of pages and be pored over and discussed in minute detail, so it stands to reason it takes the time it takes, the time has no bearing against the nature of the decision, as much as we would all like them to say masters is a chancer of a **** who went headlong into a fraudulent investigation at the behest of a bunch of corrupt cartel pricks, to put that in legalese takes time.
Click to expand...

Mr. Masters acted recklessly and without due diligence by initiating a demonstrably fraudulent investigation, apparently under the influence or direction of individuals whose conduct may reasonably be characterised as corrupt or conspiratorial


Didn’t really take that long ;)
 
Here's a question, not completely unrelated to the actual topic of the thread.

During the UEFA FFP proceedings, City were pissed off that there were several leaks about how guilty we were coming from UEFA before we had even been referred to the Adjudicatory Chamber for a decision. This was the subject of a separate appeal to CAS which we lost, but the main CAS decision indicated that we had made an official complaint to UEFA about that.

Does anyone know what happened to that complaint?
 
Chris in London said:
Here's a question, not completely unrelated to the actual topic of the thread.

During the UEFA FFP proceedings, City were pissed off that there were several leaks about how guilty we were coming from UEFA before we had even been referred to the Adjudicatory Chamber for a decision. This was the subject of a separate appeal to CAS which we lost, but the main CAS decision indicated that we had made an official complaint to UEFA about that.

Does anyone know what happened to that complaint?
Click to expand...

I would hazard a guess, not very much.
 
metalblue said:
Mr. Masters acted recklessly and without due diligence by initiating a demonstrably fraudulent investigation, apparently under the influence or direction of individuals whose conduct may reasonably be characterised as corrupt or conspiratorial


Didn’t really take that long ;)
Click to expand...
mate imagine you're on a ridiculous wage to do it and try again ;) if it was me id be dragging it to 2035
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I can't be bothered to dig it out but I am pretty sure it has been stated publically by the PL that there will be a separate decision for any penalty at a later date. The impact of a guilty decision on the main allegations would be huge. It would impact on other clubs, sponsors, etc. It would be lunacy to impose a sanction without input from other member clubs. City would challenge the decision legally as well. A further complication would be the imminent arrival of an Independent Regulator. If City were relegated for example the Football League Clubs would have to be consulted.
Click to expand...
I just can’t see on what basis an IC would canvass other PL member clubs re any sanction nor, can I see on what basis they would be talking to the EFL or its clubs during its deliberations. The whole thrust of the disciplinary process is that it’s independent.

If City were expelled (something I doubt is even the remotest of possibilities ) then yes there would be all sorts of conversations between the likes of the FA, EFL and its clubs but again I doubt PL clubs would be part of that conversation. If however a points deduction led to relegation then as far as I am aware the EFL would be duty bound to accept City as a member club.

As long as IC is operating in accord with the PL process and in accordance with English law on what grounds would City be able to challenge through the courts ? Yes any guilty findings on the more serious of the allegations would certainly lead to an appeal but in line with the PL process not by reference to the courts .

I am not questioning what has been put in the public domain as to how any sanctions would be a separate IC .

That said we aren’t the wiser as to what the club or PL do or don’t know at this point nor do we know if ithere be any further contributions prior to sanctions being determined. Hence my comment about how mitigating and aggravating factors being discussed before findings being published along with sanctions in previous cases.
 
Chris in London said:
Here's a question, not completely unrelated to the actual topic of the thread.

During the UEFA FFP proceedings, City were pissed off that there were several leaks about how guilty we were coming from UEFA before we had even been referred to the Adjudicatory Chamber for a decision. This was the subject of a separate appeal to CAS which we lost, but the main CAS decision indicated that we had made an official complaint to UEFA about that.

Does anyone know what happened to that complaint?
Click to expand...
Wasn’t it dealt with under this separate CAS adjudication ?

 
dronefromsector7G said:
View attachment 154467
Click to expand...

Nothing to see here....

Moj3.gif
 
terraloon said:
I am unable to find any provision within the set arrangements in the PL rules that detail how a second IC will determine the penalty, if one is indeed appropriate but, as we know the claim is that the first IC won’t determine any penalty.
I believe in many / all of the PL cases to date the two parties outline what they believe to be aggravating and indeed mitigating factors even before a verdict is delivered . It may of course be that the IC have already handed its conclusions to the head of disciplinary matters at the PL who has now charged a separate panel to act on the conclusions but one thing I somehow doubt that there will be another hearing as such.
Click to expand...
In many/all of the IC cases to date, the 'defendant' has admitted guilt, so the IC has only been ruling on the punishment. That's not the case with City who have denied all of the allegations. In the previous cases, guilt was already determined, so the only question was punishment. In City's case the allegations need to be proven before punishment can be decided
 
Chris in London said:
Here's a question, not completely unrelated to the actual topic of the thread.

During the UEFA FFP proceedings, City were pissed off that there were several leaks about how guilty we were coming from UEFA before we had even been referred to the Adjudicatory Chamber for a decision. This was the subject of a separate appeal to CAS which we lost, but the main CAS decision indicated that we had made an official complaint to UEFA about that.

Does anyone know what happened to that complaint?
Click to expand...
It vanished when Rick Parry left UEFA and went to the Football League.
 
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