Man City Challenges Premier League’s Financial Rule Proposals Ahead of Crucial Vote
Manchester City has reportedly issued a letter to all Premier League clubs, including rivals Manchester United, and the Football Association (FA) ahead of a critical vote on proposed financial rule changes. The club has expressed strong concerns, claiming the amendments to the Associated Party Transaction (APT) regulations are “unlawful.”
Background of the Dispute
The controversy stems from an October tribunal ruling, where both Manchester City and the Premier League claimed partial victories. The tribunal acknowledged the need for APT governance but deemed certain aspects of the framework to violate EU competition law. This ruling led to the Premier League revising its APT policies.
City’s most senior lawyer, Simon Cliff, has criticized the Premier League’s reworked proposals, arguing they still fail to comply with the tribunal’s decision. According to a letter seen by the BBC, Cliff stated, “It is important that a new regime is grounded in rules that are fair, considered, and legal. Our strong desire is to avoid any future costly legal disputes on this issue, and so it is critical that the Premier League gets it right this time round.”
Cliff also criticized the expedited consultation process, suggesting that clubs would be “voting blind.”
Premier League’s Response
The Premier League issued a strong rebuttal to City’s accusations, stating it “rejects in the strongest possible terms the repeated and baseless assertions” made by the club. It insisted that the consultation process was fair, transparent, and conducted responsibly.
The Premier League defended its position, saying, “That MCFC does not agree with the proposed amendments, or with the timing of the process being undertaken, does not mean the consultation itself is deficient or that the league has failed to comply with its obligations as a regulator.”
Proposed Financial Changes
One of the key amendments under discussion involves shareholder loans. The tribunal previously ruled that loans from club owners should be included in spending limits. The Premier League’s new proposal seeks to incorporate these loans into financial calculations but without retroactively applying interest costs to loans agreed upon before the rule change.
Simon Cliff argued this approach contradicts the tribunal’s decision, stating it would create “market distortions” and is “not lawful.” He emphasized the need for further dialogue to address unresolved issues, especially regarding whether the entire APT framework was deemed void by the tribunal.
Cliff remarked, “Common sense dictates that the Premier League should not rush into passing amendments—particularly ones which entail material legal risk—until [it] knows the outcome from the tribunal.”
Premier League Stands Firm
In its response, the Premier League dismissed City’s legal threats as “meritless” and lacking credible grounds. It stated, “Such threats are advanced without any attempt to articulate a credible ground on which MCFC could seek to restrain the consultation process.”
The league also accused Manchester City of presenting a “tendentious and inaccurate interpretation” of meeting minutes from previous consultations with clubs.
A Legal Battle Brewing?
This ongoing legal wrangle adds another chapter to the complex relationship between Manchester City and the Premier League. While City maintains its support for “robust, effective, and lawful regulation,” the club insists that more time and clarity are essential before any vote takes place.
As the Premier League pushes forward with its proposals, the outcome of next week’s vote will likely determine whether these simmering tensions escalate into a full-blown legal dispute.
