On Friday, Manchester City’s most senior lawyer Simon Cliff wrote to the club’s rivals and the Football Association (FA), attaching legal analysis and stating the club considers the proposed rules “unlawful”.
Cliff said City are “strongly in favour of robust, effective and lawful regulation”, but because the two sides disagreed over whether the tribunal’s ruling had rendered the current APT framework void, a further deliberation by the panel was “essential”.
He added: “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,” also arguing “clubs will be voting blind”.
“It is important that a new regime is grounded in rules that are fair, considered and legal,” said Cliff.
“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 added the proposals “would introduce into the rules a retrospective exemption for shareholder loans”, which he said is “one of the very things that was found to be illegal in the recent arbitration”.
He said it is “not lawful to reintroduce it into the rules” as “the proposals would create market distortions.”
This comes after English Football League Chairman Rick Parry expressed concern at “a whole raft of competition law cases which are impacting on the way that we run the game”.
“To be looking over our shoulder all of the time with challenges from clubs if they don’t like rules… the game will grind to a halt unless we find a solution for that” he told Sport.
“I have no problem with us having to be more professional. But it’s the willingness of clubs at the drop of a hat to challenge the whole system.”
“You have to question how long you can function effectively while that mentality exists, and we have to find a solution to that.”
