A new era for legal claims in English football — Manchester City's rule breaches explained

Manchester City’s alleged Premier League rule breaches represent one of the most significant regulatory and sports law cases in the history of English football. The sheer number of alleged breaches — alongside the length of time over which they’re said to have occurred — means that despite talk of the process coming to an end, what’s now playing out is merely chapter one in a long-running saga.

Some of the allegations that have generated the most attention include whether information supplied to regulators was accurate and complete. There aren’t only multiple charges that have been laid but a span of no less than nine years in which these practices are said to have occurred. If proven, these could move the case beyond questions of overspending and into questions concerning the adequacy and integrity of the regulatory process itself.

In short, this isn’t merely a football story. It’s a governance story.

Here, Paul Lunt — our Head of Litigation who appeared on BBC Radio 5 Live over the weekend to give his take on the case — offers a lawyer’s perspective on the charges. He covers whether titles could be stripped, what the appeals process could look like, what other clubs need to know and importantly, what could happen next...

What’s the big deal? A quick background

Recent media reports suggest that Manchester City have allegedly been found liable in respect of 114 of the 115 charges brought by the Premier League — although there has been no official public confirmation of either the findings or their reasoning. 

Manchester City have publicly maintained their innocence and indicated that the process remains ongoing, with Chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak emphasising that "the Premier League process still has a long way to run". 

Yet from a legal, regulatory and commercial perspective, in many ways this matter is unprecedented. Public reporting describes this as the largest regulatory case ever brought by the Premier League and regardless of the ultimate outcome, it has already become a landmark dispute concerning financial regulation, governance, enforcement powers, sporting integrity and compensation claims within professional sport.

The proceedings concern:

• 115 separate charges.
• Alleged conduct spanning nine football seasons between 2009 and 2018.
• Financial reporting issues.
• Sponsorship valuation issues.
• Player and manager remuneration issues.
• Alleged failures to cooperate with Premier League investigations.

When the charges were announced on 6 February 2023, having regard to the timescales envisaged within Premier League Rules, many observers anticipated what would now been seen as a relatively swift determination. Those Rules generally expect a conclusion within a matter of months. 

Instead, nearly four years have passed, significant confidentiality continues to surround the proceedings, no public liability decision has yet been formally released and no sanctions have yet been imposed. 

The delay itself has become part of the story, raising wider questions regarding regulatory effectiveness and enforcement within elite football. The Premier League has acknowledged widespread frustration at how long the process has taken already. 

Could Manchester City’s titles be stripped?

Under the Premier League disciplinary framework, a commission has a broad range of powers available to it. These include the likes of reprimands, financial penalties, points deductions, suspension, expulsion but also a broad residual power to make “any other order it thinks fit”.

That final provision has fuelled extensive media speculation. Could titles, cups or other honours be retrospectively removed from Manchester City and awarded to runners-up?

From a litigation perspective, considerable caution should be exercised before assuming that such outcomes are realistic.

Here’s why:

1. Lack of direct precedent

There’s no obvious English football precedent involving the retrospective transfer of Premier League titles from one club to another.

2. Absence of express rules

The relevant regulations don’t appear to expressly provide a detailed mechanism for redistributing historical titles and honours.

3. Legal reluctance towards retrospectivity

Courts and tribunals generally approach retrospective interference with established rights cautiously unless expressly authorised.

4. Practical complications

Reallocating titles years later would create substantial sporting, commercial, historical and contractual difficulties.

Added to the above context is the fact that this is, after all, a judicial process. Lawyers and the judiciary are generally cautious about setting new precedents and that’s all the more so where there are no clear pathways to a given outcome.  

Manchester City’s possible legal tactics

One of the most interesting recent developments has been the language adopted by Manchester City, even as news is breaking about findings against the club.

The club's statement contained the party line on the Club being innocent but then went further and included the following:

"The Club has diligently respected due process for eight years on the basis the Premier League Board and Executive would behave as an independent, impartial and fair-minded regulator, free from partisan influence." 

That wording appears to me to have been carefully chosen.

It’s an exercise in reading between the lines but my take on this is that City are digging in for a much longer battle than is currently being talked about in much of the media coverage. 

The combination of (a) emphasising that the process still has a “long way to run” and (b) seemingly gratuitously raising topics that include the independence of the regulator, fairness of the whole process, possible bias or partisan influence, signal to me the contemplation of a much broader attack on any decision of the Commission than merely an appeal under the Rules.

Whether that ultimately develops into substantive grounds of challenge remains to be seen but the language suggests that the club regards the dispute as far from concluded.

The appeal process explained

Assuming that liability findings are ultimately made public and upheld against Manchester City, most commentators expect an appeal to be lodged.

Under Premier League rules, the mechanics of that would normally envisage:

• Appeals must be lodged within 14 days.
• An appeal board would then be appointed by the Chair of the Judicial Panel, comprising three members.
• An appeal hearing (of no more than five days) ought to be listed within 12 weeks, with a decision inside 30 days.
• The appeal board has broad powers to uphold, vary or overturn the original decision, yet this is a review of the same evidence that was put before the Commission, rather than a re-hearing. 

However, the reality in this particular case has already demonstrated that what procedural rules envisage and what actually occurs in exceptionally complex litigation are often very different things.

The proceedings to date have already vastly exceeded the timetable ordinarily contemplated by the rules.

Compensation claims — what clubs need to know

Perhaps the most commercially significant issue here for football clubs isn’t the sanction itself. It’s the compensation claims that might follow.

The catalyst can be seen as Burnley's successful claim against Everton, arising from Everton's 2022 PSR breach. The case resulted in approximately £26m in compensation being awarded to Burnley, plus just over £9m in interest. While this matter is currently subject to appeal, the establishment of viable club-to-club claims has fundamentally altered the landscape. For the first time, clubs have seen a pathway by which one may seek substantial damages from another arising out of regulatory breaches.

Any compensation claim against Manchester City, however, would require far more than merely proof that rules were breached. Prospective claimants would need to carefully examine the findings made against Man City, the specific basis on which rules were found to have been broken and the extent to which wrongdoing has already been established. That would then form a platform from which clubs would overlay their analysis of what lawyers call the ‘counterfactual’ — i.e., what would have happened had City played by the rules, rather than breaching them?

In other words, trying to establish what difference the rule breaches made — and then putting a value on that — is the unenviable task within any compensation claim.

What happens next?

The most likely sequence is:

1. Formal publication of liability findings.
2. Detailed scrutiny of the commission's reasoning.
3. Appeal proceedings.
4. Determination of sanctions.
5. Likely multiple compensation claims.

Even under the most optimistic timetable, this is unlikely to be the end of the ‘115 charges’ story. It may only be the beginning. 

Talk to us

English football could be entering a new era in which regulatory enforcement, appeals, sporting sanctions and private compensation claims are increasingly intersecting.

The Manchester City proceedings may ultimately prove to be the most influential sports law decision of the modern Premier League era — not because of the sanctions imposed but the legal claims and regulatory precedents that could follow in their wake.

If you’re looking for trusted legal guidance, our award-winning sports law team is here to help. Our football specialists are proud to advise an array of Premier League and EFL clubs, managers, coaches and players, as well as international sports agencies. With over 50 specialist litigators, our team stands ready to unpick the finer details of this case as more emerges over the coming weeks and months. 

Get in touch by calling 0333 004 4488, emailing hello@brabners.com or completing our contact form.