There are still so many unanswered questions about the Manchester City case, which could still drag on for some time and take many more twists and turns yet.For now, though, where are we and what does the immediate future look like? Read on as I spoke to Yasin Patel, a leading lawyer specialising in Sports Law. Patel has represented players and officials in cases relating to match fixing and other scandals in cricket and the Olympics, and here’s what he had to say on the City situation…We’ve heard a lot about the Man City verdict, but perhaps you can lay out what it means in simple terms and why it’s so significant?“In February 2023, City were charged with more than 100 breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules following a four-year investigation. The club was referred to an independent commission over allegations it breached financial rules between 2009 and 2018.“The hearing began in September 2024 behind closed doors and concluded that December after around 12 weeks. The Premier League claimed City breached rules requiring the club to provide ‘accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position’. City strongly denied all charges and have said their case is supported by a ‘comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence’.“The club won eight trophies in the period covered by the case, including three Premier League titles, three League Cups, one Community Shield and one FA Cup. The charges cover the managerial tenures of Roberto Mancini and Manuel Pellegrini, and the first two years under Pep Guardiola.“A separate case between City and the Premier League was also heard last year. In 2024, an independent arbitration panel found against aspects of the league’s Associated Party Transaction regulations (APTs) after City launched an arbitration challenge. A tribunal held in February 2025 found the Premier League’s rules governing sponsorship deals from the period between 2021 and 2024 are ‘void and unenforceable’.(Photo by Michael Steele/Getty Images)“City and the Premier League reached a settlement in September 2025, with the club accepting the APT rules are valid and binding and both parties agreeing to terminate legal proceedings. The rules were formed by the Premier League to prevent clubs from profiting from commercial deals with companies linked to their owners that are deemed above ‘fair market value’.The charges were:54x Failure to provide accurate financial information 2009-10 to 2017-1814x Failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009-10 to 2017-185x Failure to comply with Uefa’s rules including Financial Fair Play (FFP) 2013-14 to 2017-187x Breaching Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) 2015-16 to 2017-1835x Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations December 2018 – Feb 2023This is all significant due to the fact that the Premier League are saying that Man City have lied and in effect have committed fraud.Man City will likely appeal – in your view, what grounds do they have to appeal and could it still be that they avoid a serious punishment?“Man City have lodged their appeal and it is their assessment that the commission’s verdict ‘contains clear material errors, of law, principle and fact and is unsafe’. They said again they were ‘innocent of the accusations’ and that ‘a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence exists in support of all of its positions’.“They are likely to say that the extra £830 million did not come from the Owners but came from sponsors and the Abu Dhabi Government and that they are not excluded from having money from these sources. They are likely to say that the Commission has wrongly come to a conclusion and that they had not even questioned other ‘third’ parties if they now say these agreements with them were a ‘sham’ or not legitimate.“Owners Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) – a private investment company belonging to United Arab Emirates vice-president and deputy prime minister Sheikh Mansour – are said to have topped up the value of commercial deals as part of a ‘disguised funding scheme’ to the scale of £830.69m. This, it was argued, enabled the club to appear to comply with Premier League and Uefa financial rules. Premier League rules allow state-owned bodies to sponsor clubs.“If they are successful in their arguments they are likely to have a sentence that is not as big, in terms of fines, points deduction and transfer bans as some people are predicting now.”Given the seriousness of the charges, what’s your educated guess on a likely punishment? And what sort of time frame are we looking at?“I anticipate that there will be very large fines. There will be points deductions for a minimum of this season, it is possible that there may even be a points deduction for the following season and probably a transfer ban as well. Inevitably, the scale of the points deduction would lead to relegation this year.“A suspended points deduction for future years, based upon Man City’s behaviour is also something that may be considered. Then there is the question of punishment from the FA, who have the power to act against clubs and individuals who are proven to have broken rules and/or acted dishonestly as the FA will say that the integrity of the game has been damaged. Any FA action will realistically only happen at the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings and all Appeals processes.”Could it also be realistic to expect individual legal action taken by rival clubs?“Four teams have stated they will take legal action but other teams are likely to follow suit. In 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, Norwich and Hull finished 18th respectively. They could argue that, had the Premier League taken action, they may not have been relegated.“This is a complex argument, but it illustrates how some clubs may seek compensation. If these two clubs were to make this argument, it could be said that Manchester City should not have to pay both as only one could possibly have benefitted had City been ultimately relegated. The clubs would have to prove that Man City’s alleged actions caused them to ultimately suffer losses due to relegation and the financial implications that followed.“It would probably be easier for teams who were relegated to make this argument collectively rather than individually. The teams could also turn their wrath on the Premier League and argue that if they had done their investigations and subsequent hearings more expeditiously, then Manchester City would not have been able to continue in their actions.“Other teams that may take actions could include those who lost out on European football, either because of Manchester City taking a Champions League spot, meaning that they ultimately were outside the European places, or because they missed out on Europe after failing to win cup competitions. In 2010-2011 and 20182019 this was Wigan and Watford: they too may seek compensation.”It’s been reported that City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak is protected by diplomatic immunity – what does this mean for the case?“Diplomatic Immunity is a position whereby the individual in question is protected from any legal proceedings or action: in this case, Khaldoon Al Mubarak would not be required to answered any questions in relation to this case and any of the allegations.“This is particularly significant in this case as there are allegations of fraud, dishonesty, falsifying accounts, avoiding taxation and much more: possibly, criminal conduct activity and allegations.(Photo by Shaun Botterill/Getty Images)“However, immunity does not place diplomats outside the law. It determines whether the receiving State may use particular judicial proceedings or coercive measures against a protected person; it does not make unlawful conduct lawful, establish innocence, or extinguish legal responsibility.“Persons enjoying diplomatic privileges and immunities remain under a duty to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State and, subject to the Convention, not to interfere in its internal affairs (Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, art. 41).”Do you think Al Mubarak’s diplomatic immunity means Man City might be able to resist any calls for an ownership change?“The two are separate matters: in relation to fit ownership, the question will be whether the current owners continue to pass the ‘fit and proper person test’, and that terminology in itself has wide meaning.“The test is designed to protect the image and integrity of the league and the clubs that play in it. The question will be whether the owners of Man City pass this test. There is no criminal conviction here, no tax avoidance, no losses to any person: just money being put into a club that belongs to the Abu Dhabi government or the owners (depending upon whose side you currently accept).“The gravamen of the alleged offence is that the rules of how money should be put in have been broken. Is that any worse then other allegations against other owners? West Ham United’s owner, David Sullivan has been the subject of allegations from several women that many would say are not just morally unacceptable and that he should not be an owner of a club in light of these actions: but he still is.”The post Exclusive: What will Man City’s appeal look like and is Khaldoon Al Mubarak “immune” from legal action? A leading Sports Lawyer speaks… appeared first on CaughtOffside.