Manchester City have claimed victory in their legal dispute over the Premier League’s associated party transaction (APT) regulations, after a tribunal found aspects of the rules to be unlawful.
The champions said they had “succeeded” with their claim against the APT rules, after a panel said that the exclusion of shareholder loans from APT calculations and the process by which clubs were informed of “benchmarking” decisions were unlawful.
The tribunal also found that decisions by the Premier League to veto two sponsorship deals must be set aside because of improper procedures related to benchmarking.
The Premier League said in essence the verdict had been a victory for it, because it “upheld the need for the APT system as a whole and rejected the majority of Manchester City’s challenges”. The league said it planned to “quickly and effectively” adjust its rule book in discussion with its shareholder clubs.
This verdict brings to an end a process which began this year after the league revised its rules over APTs. It has no direct connection to the legal process which has seen the league charge City with 130 breaches of its rule book.
City have denied wrongdoing and lawyers began hearing that case on September 16th, with a verdict expected in the new year.
APTs, in which clubs strike sponsorship or revenue deals with businesses linked to their owners, have been the subject of scrutiny from the league for some time. In February clubs voted to approve tougher rules regarding how such deals are valued. A requirement to assess fair market value for APTs was challenged by City, who have argued it contravenes competition law.
City are understood to have asked for financial damages from the league for perceived losses from sponsorship deals that were halted by the rules. They argue that the league has not been able to prove that clubs get an unfair advantage from APTs and that it has previously failed to act with the same urgency to control big spending by dominant sides.
The takeover of Newcastle United by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund in 2021 had previously occasioned hurried attempts by clubs to change APT rules.
City also allege the rules were designed to stymie owners from Gulf states and members of multi-club ownership groups – something that applies to City in both instances – and were only established due to the desire of rivals to “safeguard their own commercial advantages”. Guardian
