Manchester City have reportedly sent a letter to 19 other clubs condemning "unlawful" new Premier League rules and threatening possible legal action.
Article continues below
Article continues below
Article continues below
City question the Premier League's sponsorship rulesWant clubs to refrain from voting for amendmentsCity’s legal counsel accuse PL of misleading clubsFollow GOAL on WhatsApp! 🟢📱WHAT HAPPENED?
According to the the Premier League champions have sent an 11-page letter to other top-flight clubs explaining their reasons for opposing the proposed amendments in the Premier League’s sponsorship regulations. In September, an independent tribunal ruled that certain Premier League rules, including the exclusion of shareholder loans from the FMV test, were unlawful. These loans are provided by individuals or entities holding more than a five per cent stake in clubs. Following this ruling, Premier League chief executive Richard Masters assured clubs that necessary amendments could be swiftly implemented.
AdvertisementGetty WHAT ARE MAN CITY'S OBJECTIONS?
However, City’s legal counsel, Simon Cliff, has openly challenged Masters’ assertions, accusing him of misleading clubs about the feasibility of amending the rules. The proposed changes would introduce a retrospective exemption for shareholder loans covering the period from December 2021 until the new rules take effect. City argue that this approach is illegal because the recent arbitration already declared such exemptions unlawful.
They further contend that allowing some clubs to benefit from shareholder loans while others did not is inherently unfair. Finally, he criticises the Premier League for allegedly hastening the amendment process. Cliff underlines the importance of waiting for the tribunal’s final verdict before proceeding with any voting for changes. He warns that the tribunal may rule all Advanced Profitability and Sustainability (APT) rules void, questioning how clubs can "meaningfully discuss amendments to rules without knowing if those very rules even exist?"
WHAT CLIFF SAID
According to Cliff has argued that City are "strongly in favour of robust, effective and lawful regulation of related party transactions. (But) common sense dictates that the PL should not rush into passing amendments – particularly ones which entail material legal risk – until the PL knows the outcome from the Tribunal."
DID YOU KNOW?
Previously, the Premier League had pushed back against City’s claims in a strongly worded rebuttal. The league believes the club is making “repeated and baseless assertions” and insisted that its actions comply with regulatory obligations. They dismissed City’s accusations of misleading clubs and called their threats of legal action “meritless.” It further states, “That MCFC does not agree with the process does not provide a credible basis to impugn it.”