UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%
  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%
  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%

  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
It really gets on my fucking nerves when I see people repeating Panick is on 20 grand a day
It's not a small amount of money but his fees are probably about £500+vat an hour
Then he will have a team of people to do all the legwork for him, some of these are probably on £200/£250 an hour plus vat

The 20 grand is for an entire legal team
A leading commercial silk can demand a daily refresher of around that sum (£20k). I know Pannick doesn’t quite fit in that mould, but it’s certainly analogous. The more money that’s on the line, the more the brief will command. Stands to reason. Moreover, the quoted sum might be a conflation of his brief fee and daily refresher divided by the estimated number of days he’ll spend on the case.


Either way, fwiw, it doesn’t seem outlandish to me.
 
They’re two completely different cases, of course. I was just responding to the suggestion that Pannick even taking on the case should be a cause for optimism. At £20k a day, he probably doesn’t give a fuck about our chances either way!

I guess, though we are asking him to do something less over-reaching than QPR's crusade against FFP. From what I've watched he seems good at picking at particular points which I think will suit the procedural aspect of CAS. I'm also of the view that the owners of QPR are the sort to hire him because he's Pannick, whereas we operate in higher circles and will have done proper due diligence based on what we have to present as to who should represent us.

His professional pride, and lure of repeat business from the UAE, are enough of a motivation.
 
I imagine UEFA have an equally reputable person representing them and haven't gone for a no win no fee lawyer so i don't think we can read too much into this
Yes. If it looks like an interesting and potentially winnable case, that is enough to attract Pannick.
Remember, even the best lose half their cases.
 
If UEFA win the appeal then the only recourse is the courts for City but the ban would be likely to stand so job done with City financially hamstrung.

If City win it is hard to see the endgame. If on a technicality then the mud will have stuck requiring a separate initiative to clear our name. Will City dish the dirt?

If UEFA are shown to be in the wrong with their allegations then that opens another can of worms. So far City has been accommodating to preserve the integrity of competitions so as not to kill the golden goose. Now we have a confrontational and personal scenario.

I see the G14 as believing they have a win win position whatever the outcome. Either City is punished or UEFA takes the rap leaving the G14 free to set up their own organisation and competitions. The position of FIFA is key because UEFA are affiliated to them and players operating outside the official structure will not be eligible to play in Internationals.

So many potential twists and turns, mainly in the hands of City. No wonder Khaldoon talked about spending £30 on lawyers rather than accept being compromised on a case they thought was closed. It looks like UEFA’s last throw of the dice and hard to see what else they can do?

If we are only spending £30 on lawyers then we are fucked in my view. Even @Two Gun Bob wouldn't get out of bed for that fee.
 
Swing o meter needed again today
ofAXGFz.gif
 
A leading commercial silk can demand a daily refresher of around that sum (£20k). I know Pannick doesn’t quite fit in that mould, but it’s certainly analogous. The more money that’s on the line, the more the brief will command. Stands to reason. Moreover, the quoted sum might be a conflation of his brief fee and daily refresher divided by the estimated number of days he’ll spend on the case.


Either way, fwiw, it doesn’t seem outlandish to me.
According to Ringrose: "Court documents show Pannick charged £407,250 for a defence involving a two-day trial, which he did not attend. His colleague Monica Carss-Frisk QC, who did appear, also put in a fee for £228,150". Which is nice...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.