The Premier League issued a lengthy statement via its website with regarding to the charges brought against Manchester City. Below is the release (grab some coffee, you might need it):
An independent Commission has found Manchester City FC guilty of all charges related to serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules over a nine-season period, and the majority of charges in relation to its failure to co-operate with the League’s investigation.
The independent Commission found that between
Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:
-Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
-The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
-Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
-During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)
The independent Commission found that Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ commercial deals with a number of its sponsors during the period, which were part of a disguised funding scheme, whereby those companies were only required to pay a portion of the relevant sponsorship fees. The remainder was funded by Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd (ADUG), which owned the club. As part of the scheme, further ‘sham’ arrangements, funded by ADUG, were entered into to enable the club to record lower operating expenses than it actually incurred, as well as a ‘sham’ circular arrangement with Fordham, an entity that purchased the club’s players’ image rights, that was funded by ADUG.
The purpose of these schemes was found to have been to artificially inflate the club’s revenues, and reduce its costs, by more than £900 million during the affected period, to appear to comply with financial rules. The consequence of this, as the Commission found, was that the club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators. The Commission concluded that ‘by its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the PL Rules‘.
As a result, Manchester City failed to accurately report its income and expenditure for the purposes of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules and UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Rules. The Commission found that, had all of the relevant agreements been reported accurately in the club’s accounts, it would have been in breach of both the League’s and UEFA’s spending limits by a very substantial amount.
In addition, during the course of the four-year investigation conducted by the Premier League, the club committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League. The Commission concluded that the club had ‘made concerted efforts to stop and frustrate the PL investigation’.
Richard Masters, Chief Executive of the Premier League, said: “The core decision establishes the facts of what happened at Manchester City during this period. It details how the club systematically broke Premier League Rules for nearly a decade.
“It also vindicates the Premier League’s decision to pursue this case against Manchester City. While the process to date has been both long and difficult, the League has remained determined that the facts be established independently.
“It is a key responsibility of the Premier League to ensure that the Rules, approved by the clubs themselves, are upheld to protect the integrity of the competition. It is paramount that the League remains competitive and fair for all clubs and for the fans. We take that role extremely seriously.
“This disciplinary case, and this decision, are the most significant in Premier League history. There are elements of the case that remain to be decided, including, importantly, what sanction must follow for these breaches. Now we have the Commission’s decision, we are committed to moving swiftly through the remainder of the process, to provide certainty for the League, our clubs and fans.”
The independent Commission’s findings are set out in a Core Decision, of which a redacted version has been published (click here). The Commission’s award comprises both the Core Decision and a large number of additional appendices, which the League is committed to publishing as soon as it is able.
The League is able to publish the Core Decision because the Commission has ruled (and an Appeal Board has confirmed) that the Commission’s decision is a ‘final award’.
Now that the charges have been proved, the issue of sanction will be addressed separately in a further hearing with the independent Commission. In accordance with Premier League rules, that hearing will remain private and confidential until such a time as publication of the outcome is permitted.
The club has the right to appeal the independent Commission’s findings and has until Friday 2 October to exercise that right.
The Premier League Board’s intention is that the full process (including any appeals and publication of relevant decisions) is concluded as soon as possible.
Notes to Editors
Premier League investigation, independent Commission process:-The Premier League began its investigation into Manchester City in December 2018, and a complaint was subsequently issued under Section W of the League’s rules in February 2023
-The independent Commission held a 42-day hearing, which concluded in December 2024
-In explaining the length of time it had taken to provide the parties with a decision, the independent Commission wrote: ‘It has taken us much longer than we would have wished, and much longer than we had anticipated would be the case when the hearing concluded, to produce our Decision. That is regrettable.
‘However, we were fortunate to have available to us throughout the period in which our Decision has been being prepared not only all of the documents that were used at the hearing but also
(a) verbatim transcripts of the evidence given by each witness and expert at the hearing. Those transcripts ran to approximately 7,000 pages, and (b) extremely detailed written submissions from the parties (that they had supplemented orally over four days at the end of the hearing) on the evidence and each of the numerous issues that we were tasked with determining in the proceedings.’
Premier League investigations, independent Commissions, and Appeal Boards
-The Premier League Board has the power to investigate any suspected or alleged breach of Premier League Rules
-Where, following the conclusion of an investigation or otherwise, the Board believes that there is a suspicion or allegation of a Rule breach, it has a number of options available to it. One of these options is to issue a written complaint and refer the matter to a Commission
-The League has established an independent Judicial Panel, comprising a number of legal, financial and other experts
-Members of the Judicial Panel are appointed by its independent Chair. It is also the Chair of the Judicial Panel who selects members of the Judicial Panel to sit on Commissions, which are independent of the Premier League. The Chair of the Judicial Panel at the time of the Complaint in these proceedings was Murray Rosen KC. The current Chair of the Judicial Panel is Sir Gary Hickinbottom
-All proceedings convened under Section W of the Rules are confidential and heard in private
-The Commission appointed under Section W of the Rules has a broad discretion as to the sanctions it wishes to apply, the non-exhaustive list set out in rules includes fines, points deductions and other sporting sanctions
-Whenever a Commission makes what is described as a ‘final award’ in the rules, such decisions are published on the Premier League website
-A party to proceedings that wishes to challenge a decision of the Commission may do so under Section W of the Premier League Rules, by filing an appeal to be heard before an Appeal Board
-Appeal Boards are also appointed by the Chair of the Judicial Panel and must have three members, one of whom should have held judicial office, and would sit as the chair of the Appeal Board
-An Appeal Board has wide discretion in respect of the appeal, and may allow it, dismiss it, or make any other order that it thinks fit (including varying the order of Commission)
For further information on the disciplinary process, please see Section W of the Premier League Handbook.
Confidentiality
-The disciplinary proceedings between the Premier League and the club have been confidential, as provided for in the League’s Rules
-Premier League Rules provide for the publication of the outcomes of final awards of Commissions
-It has recently been determined that certain aspects about the findings of the Commission in these proceedings may be published under the League’s Rules
-At this stage, the Premier League is only permitted to publish a redacted version of the summary of the Commission’s ‘core findings’
-The process remains ongoing and any further information related to the proceedings that has not been published by the Premier League remains confidential. When the Premier League is able to do so under the League’s Rules – unless legally prevented from doing so – the Premier League will publish the full Decision and any further updates. In the meantime, all aspects of the ongoing process will be confidential
Manchester City issued a retort via its website:
Manchester City FC is both disappointed and surprised by the opinion of the Premier League Commission, that has been published today.
The Club is innocent of the accusations made by the Premier League and a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence exists in support of all of its positions, relating to this case. The Club will therefore be relentless, and where necessary proactive, in any and all appropriate regulatory and legal forums.
The Premier League process remains ongoing, with significant elements uncompleted. Manchester City FC will now pursue the appeal avenues open to it, on the basis that the opinion contains clear material errors, of law, principle and fact, and is unsafe.
The Club has diligently respected due process for eight years on the basis that the Premier League Board and Executive would behave as an independent, impartial and fair-minded regulator, free from partisan influence.
The Club is obviously restricted in what it can say further until all future proceedings are complete.
The widespread belief is that this could linger for a spell as City is likely to appeal any sanctions brought against it.
Join the conversation!
Sign up for a user account and get:
- New, improved notifications system!
- Fewer ads
- Create community posts
- Comment on articles, community posts
- Rec comments, community posts
