PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

JASR said:
From September, legal documentation of the process.
Cant remember seeing it posted before, apologies if it has been discussed before.
www.nortonrosefulbright.com

Manchester City v The Premier League: What happens next in the “115 charges” litigation?

Manchester City Football Club (City or the Club) and the Premier League are embroiled in a dispute involving 115 alleged breaches of the Premier League Rules (the Rule or Rules). These charges predominantly concern Manchester City’s financial reporting.
www.nortonrosefulbright.com www.nortonrosefulbright.com

Most/all seems to be old stated info, but this paragraph was interesting, especially the last sentence, regarding the potential knock-on affect from APT stuff:
View attachment 175288

Edit: note: I have no legal/accounting knowledge or the stomach to wade through legal speak :-)
Click to expand...
Is this just an opinion of procedures or an official write-up of same case?
 
The decision by the panel haa to be unanimous - unlike the CAS verdict - so that's been a huge part of the delay, but I suspect a party to the procedings has asked for a delay to get it's house in order before the verdict is announced.
Probably the PL.
 
BlueAnorak said:
The decision by the panel haa to be unanimous - unlike the CAS verdict - so that's been a huge part of the delay, but I suspect a party to the procedings has asked for a delay to get it's house in order before the verdict is announced.
Probably the PL.
Click to expand...
Which would probably make it even more difficult to secure a 'guilty' verdict.

All three would have to be of the opinion that we committed fraud, etc. And if one isn't, would that mean that we officially didn't, or would it constitute an indefinite deferment until such time as all three could be sufficiently convinced/got fet up and caved, etc.?
 
JASR said:
From September, legal documentation of the process.
Cant remember seeing it posted before, apologies if it has been discussed before.
www.nortonrosefulbright.com

Manchester City v The Premier League: What happens next in the “115 charges” litigation?

Manchester City Football Club (City or the Club) and the Premier League are embroiled in a dispute involving 115 alleged breaches of the Premier League Rules (the Rule or Rules). These charges predominantly concern Manchester City’s financial reporting.
www.nortonrosefulbright.com www.nortonrosefulbright.com

Most/all seems to be old stated info, but this paragraph was interesting, especially the last sentence, regarding the potential knock-on affect from APT stuff:
View attachment 175288

Edit: note: I have no legal/accounting knowledge or the stomach to wade through legal speak :-)
Click to expand...
It’s wrong
 
SilverFox2 said:
Is this just an opinion of procedures or an official write-up of same case?
Click to expand...
I think it’s a piece by a global law firm, presumably by someone with an interest in football, that lays out the facts in a reasonably readable order (for the layman) and has some opinions on what the potential reasonings of the IC might be, and the potential consequences (either way).
I doubt it has anymore info than people like @slbsn , @Prestwich_Blue et al (as usual apologies to anybody else not mentioned on the legal/accounting side who contributes so well on this thread) already know, but it was a large piece by a global legal firm that seems to have flown under the radar when it was published. The highlighted paragraph and final sentence is what really caught my eye
 
BlueAnorak said:
The decision by the panel haa to be unanimous - unlike the CAS verdict - so that's been a huge part of the delay, but I suspect a party to the procedings has asked for a delay to get it's house in order before the verdict is announced.
Probably the PL.
Click to expand...
I think you have made that up .
 
Plays By Sense Of Smell said:
Which would probably make it even more difficult to secure a 'guilty' verdict.

All three would have to be of the opinion that we committed fraud, etc. And if one isn't, would that mean that we officially didn't, or would it constitute an indefinite deferment until such time as all three could be sufficiently convinced/got fet up and caved, etc.?
Click to expand...
Presumably the alleged offences are individually being assessed so do they dismiss all the 2-1 s and only process the 3-0 s?
 
Chappie said:
I think you have made that up .
Click to expand...
Stefan seems to agree with this.

I really am confused, several times the legal opinions on this thread give absolute definite opinions which I would normally completely accept then on occasions the same legal authorities say a judge may think differently despite this certainty.

When is "certain" certain or is all legal opinion shrouded in doubt.?
 
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