City Raider
Well-Known Member
Liverpool signing De Bruyne if we get a ban... well a scouser told me so last night whilst rubbing his palms together.
He’ll have a job shifting Henderson from that midfield.
Liverpool signing De Bruyne if we get a ban... well a scouser told me so last night whilst rubbing his palms together.
No, burden is the appellants.Yep surely the burden of proof must lie on UEFA, given CAS looks at everything anew.
Pep: "On July 10th it's the draw and on the 13th will be the sentence. After that, i will give my opinion. We wait for the resolution from UEFA. This season is not going to change, it is so beautiful what we have in front of us."
Does this sound concerning to anyone else or maybe just his English trying to phrase it? The term “sentence” and “resolution from UEFA” is the worrying terms here, I find.
But @projectriver told us CAS starts completely anew. So much that UEFA not following any proper processes and harming City deliberately with media leaks will not even be considered. Can't be that the burden of proof is entirely on City.
I wouldn't read too much into it - probably requested a while ago and very unlikely City's lawyers would have taken any issue with it. Likely won't change when they know the result.
Both sides must discharge their burden of proof.Was reviewing some other FFP judgments and this one is useful for showing where the burden of proof lies for City and why CAS will not overturn a 2 year ban if it finds UEFA are correct in their case...see http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/Shared Documents/4692.pdf#search=ffp settlement
"7.30 In doing so, the Sole Arbitrator adheres to the principle established by CAS jurisprudence that “in CAS arbitration, any party wishing to prevail on a disputed issue must discharge its burden of proof, i.e. it must meet the onus to substantiate its allegations and to affirmatively prove the facts on which it relies with respect to that issue, In other words, the party which asserts facts to support its rights has the burden of establishing them (..) The Code sets forth an adversarial system of arbitral justice, rather than an inquisitorial one. Hence, if a party wishes to establish some fact and persuade the deciding body, it must actively substantiate its allegations with convincing evidence” (e.g. CAS 2003/A/506, para. 54; CAS 2009/A/1810&1811, para. 46 and CAS 2009/A/1975, paras. 71ff).
7.31 However, the Sole Arbitrator finds that the Appellant has not adequately discharged the burden of proof to establish that the sanction imposed is evidently disproportionate and/or constitutes a breach of its right to equal treatment.
7.32 In doing so, the Sole Arbitrator first of all agrees with the Respondent that, pursuant to CAS jurisprudence, the review of a sanction is only possible when the sanction is evidently and grossly disproportionate to the breach, with means, inter alia, that the CAS must show restraint when evaluating whether a sanction is appropriate (see CAS 2012/A/2762 and CAS 2009/A/1844)."
Confusing 2 concepts. Still will be for City to show UEFA is wrong. It's an appeal.
I believe the agreed pushing back of an announcement happened only a couple days prior to the Daily Mail's article.
Pep: "On July 10th it's the draw and on the 13th will be the sentence. After that, i will give my opinion. We wait for the resolution from UEFA. This season is not going to change, it is so beautiful what we have in front of us."
Does this sound concerning to anyone else or maybe just his English trying to phrase it? The term “sentence” and “resolution from UEFA” is the worrying terms here, I find.