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

[SWP's back]

My question was as we haven't yet reached that stage of proceedings can the IC Adjuctary Chamber of Uefa as a regulator use such material legally to sanction. I was wondering if there was in fact a precedent for this as I wasn't aware of one.

Yes, they can do what they want. If we are unhappy with it, then we can legally appeal to CAS.

 

[SWP's back]

Not sure how any court can use the emails as evidence unless the emails are going to be reproduced in full. As far as I know UEFA are relying on the newspaper reports of the emails, not the emails themselves.

Der Spiegel said they were giving UEFA all the information they had.

 

[SWP's back]

Think we have already been found guilty just awaiting level of punishment.

Not technically, the IC don’t go into the same level of investigatory minutiae as the AC.

 

[ganganvince]

Not technically, the IC don’t go into the same level of investigatory minutiae as the AC.

In that case would the 5 year statute of limitations not apply?

 

[KS55]

But this is more complex. UEFA don’t have the hacked material so are basically making a decision based upon a third party account of hacked material - material that has been obtained for financial benefit! Hardly a credible basis for any conviction.

UEFA control bodies are not a court, neither is CAS. So court considerations only come into play if we sue Uefa in a real court. (Or vice versa). Evidentiary standards are different for tribunals.You would have to look up the rules governing CAS, or arbitration generally in Switzerland.
Fruit of the poisoned tree is an American legal concept. The law may well be different in other jurisdictions (as it is in the UK).

 

[M18CTID]

Not technically, the IC don’t go into the same level of investigatory minutiae as the AC.

So It's possible that the AC can go against any conclusion the IC reached? Interesting because if City are indeed innocent and have provided irrefutable proof, then it gives them a chance to back out before it escalates further

 

[KS55]

Yes it is. You need to stop repeating this falsehood.

NOT a court. Uefa is an industry control body and CAS is an arbitration service.

 

[shemnel]

just to throw a massive swerve ball into the already heady mix;

https://www.insidethegames.biz/arti...-rules-enforced-arbitration-of-cas-is-illegal

CAS forced arbitration has been found to be illegal under EU law, as of Sept 2018.

 

[KS55]

It should be noted that the emails are evidence of plans that were considered and things that were said. They are emphatically NOT evidence of what was actually done. In a real court, that would be a cogent argument, bur UEFA are a law unto themselves.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

So It's possible that the AC can go against any conclusion the IC reached? Interesting because if City are indeed innocent and have provided irrefutable proof, then it gives them a chance to back out before it escalates further

I think it more likely that the IC think something above their grade is indicated, and they have probably made a recommendation, even if it's a vague one (e.g. "if this is considered proven, then we recommend X") - no-one knows for certain what apart from them.

The AC - who are mostly legal types - will have to consider whether there is enough to put a charge/punishment on, and will have to consider whether any such charge will bring further action, with any detrmiental effect of having the AC's decision overturned. I assume they review the evidence laid out to them, and will engage with City as to their opinion.