The hearing into Manchester City’s 115 charges for alleged breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules begins on Monday.
City were charged and referred to an independent commission in February 2023 following a four-year investigation.
It is alleged City breached its financial rules between 2009 and 2018.
City strongly deny all charges and have said their case is supported by a “comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence”.
The Premier League claim City breached rules requiring the club to provide “accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position”.
This information covered club revenue, which includes sponsorship income and operating costs.
It has also accused the Premier League champions of not co-operating.
When the Premier League investigation began, City said the allegations were “entirely false” and that the allegations originally published in German newspaper Der Spiegel came from “illegal hacking and out of context publication of City emails”.
City have won eight league titles, multiple cups and the Champions League since their 2008 takeover by the Abu Dhabi United Group.
“It starts soon and hopefully finishes soon,” City manager Pep Guardiola said on Friday. “I am looking forward to the decision.
“I’m happy it’s starting on Monday. I know there will be more rumours, new specialists about the sentences. We’re going to see. I know what people are looking forward to, what they expect, I know, what I read for many, many years.
“Everybody is innocent until guilt is proven. So we’ll see.”
What are the 115 charges?
• 54x Failure to provide accurate financial information 2009-10 to 2017-18.
• 14x Failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009-10 to 2017-18.
• 5x Failure to comply with Uefa’s rules including Financial Fair Play (FFP) 2013-14 to 2017-18.
• 7x Breaching Premier League’s PSR rules 2015-16 to 2017-18.
• 35x Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations December 2018 – Feb 2023.
How long will the case last?
The hearing is expected to last around 10 weeks, according to media reports, taking us into late November.
When will there be a verdict?
Once the hearing is concluded, there will not be an immediate judgment. An exact date for a verdict is unknown, with reports only suggesting a decision ‘early in 2025’.
Will there be an appeal?
This type of case cannot go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas). But either side could appeal and a fresh hearing, with a new independent panel arranged.
What about legal costs?
This specific case is six years in the making, so legal fees on both sides are already estimated at tens of millions of pounds before the hearing even starts.
Expect whichever side ‘wins’ to make a claim for costs.
For context, the Premier League wanted Everton to pay the full £4.9m legal costs of their first PSR six-point deduction case from last season. Everton’s lawyer Celia Rooney told the appeal that those figures were “frankly eye-watering”.
However, an appeal board ruled Everton should pay £1.7m and the Premier League cover the remaining £3.2m legal fees.
Any costs being paid by the Premier League at the end of the City case would have to be spread across the 20 clubs which make up the league.
Who are the lawyers involved?
We don’t know who is on the independent panel which is hearing and ruling on the case – and will likely only know that once a written judgment is released.
City’s legal team is being led by Lord Pannick KC, reported to charge £5,000 an hour for his services. He helped City overturn a two-year European ban in 2020 and has also advised former Prime Minister Boris Johnston.
Man City fans unveiled a banner at Etihad Stadium last February with the slogan “Pannick on the streets of London”.
Some reports state that sports law expert Adam Lewis KC is expected to lead the Premier League’s legal team. Referring back to the Everton PSR hearing, the Premier League hired Linklaters for that case – a London-based internationally-renowned law firm.
Where is the case being heard?
The hearing is not a court case, so it is heard in private and the location is unknown. Parts of it could even be done remotely via video calls.
