Nachrichten

The Premier League has claimed that the "majority" of Manchester City’s legal challenge to its rules on commercial deals has been unsuccessful, despite the champions declaring victory in the case. Earlier this year, City launched a legal action against the league’s associated party transaction (APT) rules, arguing they were anti-competitive.

On Monday afternoon, City announced that an arbitration panel had found the rules to be unlawful and that the league had abused a dominant position. The club now plans to seek damages arising from the case.

However, the Premier League countered that there were only two findings in City’s favour regarding the rules and that City were "unsuccessful in the majority of (their) challenge". Importantly, the league stated that the tribunal had determined the APT rules were necessary and pursued a legitimate objective.

These APT rules are designed to ensure commercial deals with entities linked to a club’s owners are done for fair market value. A judgement determining all APT rules as unlawful could have had significant implications for competition within the Premier League and made it easier for clubs with the wealthiest owners to strike deals linked to their ownership, potentially benefiting from higher revenues and strengthening their position in regard to the league’s profitability and sustainability rules (PSR).

However, the Premier League maintains that while some amendments to the rules will be necessary following the panel ruling, it does not necessitate a complete overhaul, which would effectively give clubs unrestricted control over commercial deals. Both parties released the 175-page judgement on Monday afternoon, but interpreted its implications differently.

The panel did deem it anti-competitive to exclude shareholder loans from APT rules and called for changes to the newly adopted rules this year. Yet, the Premier League argued that the tribunal had upheld the legitimacy of the rules, deeming them crucial for the effectiveness of the profitability and sustainability regulations (PSR).

The Premier League stated that the panel concurred with its view that transactions evidently not at fair market value would distort competition within the league. The league also noted that the panel dismissed City’s claim that the rules were designed to discriminate against clubs with Gulf region ownership.

City countered by stating that the panel had overturned decisions by the league related to two transactions involving City, citing procedural unfairness. The club also hinted at the possibility of seeking damages based on the panel’s ruling, suggesting other clubs might follow suit.

The Premier League wrapped up its statement by highlighting that, aside from two noted exceptions, the panel found its rulebook to be in line with competition and public law standards. The panel's findings are detailed in paragraphs 592 to 602 of a total 175 pages in the document.

The initial point refers to City's objection to the original Adoption and amended rules early this year, determining the exclusion of shareholder loans as unlawful, while stating "all other challenges fail". In terms of City's complaint regarding procedural unfairness, it was recognized as unfair that City had no opportunity to review the comparable transaction data that the Premier League depended on before making decisions on fair market value, however, again concluding that "all other challenges fail".

This case stands entirely apart from the 115 accusations against City issued by the Premier League for supposed breaches of its financial regulations, which City contests. There is an active hearing concerning these allegations.