He also previously represented City against Joe Royle regarding an argument about the construction of Royle’s employment contract in relation to compensation for early termination of that fixed-term contract, essentially in terms of whether City were in the PL or the Championship at the point they sacked him. Just read the Judgment which was quite interesting.
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7a660d03e7f57eb0cab
When you read a Judgment like that it reminds one that in terms of mental reasoning, CoA Judges are generally on another planet, as are most of those who regularly appear before them, Pannick very much included. He looks like a class act from where I’m stood.