Club are disputing legality of the investigation and the involvement of the barrister in charge of the disciplinary process in case that could take four years to be resolved
Martyn Ziegler, Chief Sports Reporter
Thursday May 18 2023, 2.00pm, The Times
City are accused of not providing full details of Mancini’s pay over the four seasons he was at the club
Manchester City have lodged legal challenges against the Premier League’s 115 charges for alleged rule breaches, disputing the legality of the investigation and the involvement of the barrister who is in charge of the disciplinary process.
The Times understands that City have raised the dispute in relation to recent changes in the Premier League’s rules, arguing that they should not apply to investigations into alleged rule breaches before then.
The club are also understood to have challenged the involvement of Murray Rosen KC, the head of the Premier League’s independent judicial panel, as the person who appoints the chair of the disciplinary commission — under the rules he can appoint himself. Rosen’s profile on his chambers’ website states that he is a “member of the MCC and Arsenal FC”.
The challenges are likely to cause a further delay to the outcome of the case — legal experts believe that it could be between two and four years before it is completed. Any legal dispute between the clubs and the league should initially go to an arbitration tribunal, and beyond that it can go to the High Court and Court of Appeal.
After the charges were announced in February, City made clear that they would take every possible legal step to defend themselves and insisted they have “irrefutable evidence” to disprove the 115 alleged rule breaches over 14 seasons, from 2009-10 to the present campaign.
Although it is not certain which specific rule changes the legal challenge relates to, there have been several changes to the Premier League’s rulebook in recent seasons. In February last year, the league added new guidance to its rules stating that individuals are required to provide information and documents when asked.
Murray Rosen KC’s profile lists him a “member of the MCC and Arsenal FC”
The additional wording says: “The obligation means that those bound by the rules must not only answer questions, provide information and provide documents when requested to do so, but also that, for example (and without limitation), they must not delay at all in doing so, they must do so comprehensively, and they must do so on a co-operative and open basis, which includes volunteering relevant information and documents unknown to the board, obtaining such information and documents from other parties when able to do so, and ensuring that the appropriate individuals are made available for questioning by the board.’
At the same time, the league also introduced the potential for “interim measures” to be taken to enforce compliance.
In the 2016-17 season, a rule was amended to say: “Each club shall comply promptly and in full with any request for information made by the league.”
If the charges are proved it could lead to a range of sanctions, including a deduction of points, with the ultimate punishment being expulsion from the Premier League.
The charges include: inaccurate financial reporting over nine seasons, from 2009-10 to 2017-18; not co-operating with an investigation and handing over documents as required over five seasons, from 2018-19 to 2022-23; not providing full details of the manager Roberto Mancini’s pay over the four seasons he was at the club, from 2009-13; not providing full details of players’ remuneration over six seasons, from 2010-11 to 2015-16.
City have employed a heavyweight legal team to deal with the Premier League’s investigation and charges, including David Pannick KC. The club had previously issued legal challenges to the Premier League after an investigation was launched in December 2018 following the release of the “Football Leaks” emails obtained by the Portuguese hacker Rui Pinto, which suggested some sponsorship income from Abu Dhabi companies was in fact paid directly by the club’s owners.
Those challenges took until 2021 to reach a conclusion, and it was not until February of this year that charges were brought.
A High Court ruling in March 2021 revealed that “the PL has suggested that the Club [MCFC] has sought to delay its handing over of the relevant documents and information by making numerous procedural applications”.
City will contend the Champions League final against Inter Milan next month after their 5-1 aggregate semi-final victory over Real Madrid
It also revealed that the Premier League issued a disciplinary complaint against Manchester City in August 2019 “seeking disclosure of certain documents and information”. A commission was appointed to deal with the disciplinary complaint “but its composition and the disciplinary system were challenged by the club as not sufficiently independent or impartial”.
In October 2019, the Premier League began an arbitration process against City, seeking an order for the club to “deliver up documents and information which were being withheld”.
City brought a legal challenge then, saying that the Premier League “had no power to institute an . . . arbitration in respect of its information claim” and “that the tribunal did not have the appearance of impartiality”.
That challenge by City eventually failed, and the club and the Premier League also both failed in an attempt — that went to the Court of Appeal — to prevent the court decision from being made public.
One of the Court of Appeal judges, Lord Justice Males, said in a July 2021 ruling: “It is surprising, and a matter of legitimate public concern, that so little progress has been made after 2½ years — during which, it may be noted, the club has twice been crowned as Premier League champions.”
City also employed a heavyweight legal team in successfully contesting charges brought by Uefa for breaches of its Financial Fair Play rules. Uefa initially imposed a two-year ban from European competitions but that was overturned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in July 2020, which ruled that some charges were time-barred and that there was not enough evidence for others.
The only sanction the court confirmed was a €10 million (about £8.7 million) fine for not co-operating with Uefa’s investigation.
The latest legal challenge will also have to go to an arbitration panel initially, but beyond that it could go to the High Court. It has been suggested that City are prepared to go to the Supreme Court to fight the charges.
