Minor point, but the forced sale of the club was not unlawful, in fact laws were specifically created to force the sale of Russian-linked assets. Abramovich complied with the law instead of fighting it (as was his right) and leaving the club in operational limbo.
It's legalese for doing something to wrong someone else that causes damage to them. Legal disputes between two parties are often about determining who is liable for the tort, to what extent they are liable, and what redress or amount of damages is required to pay as compensation.
In this case it is a bit more complex. Sporting bodies like the PL enforce rules through contract - to participate in the PL, you need to agree to the terms and conditions thereby creating a contract. Each body has a set dispute resolution process and generally also require their members to be bound by the decisions/outcome of that process. Breach of contract is automatically a 'tort', but it might be, and if the PL considers it to be so, it needs to follow the English courts.
Great explanation.
Where PL / FA process differs significantly from UEFAs is that once the procedure has been followed there isn’t access to appeal any decision via the court system or indeed any other body such as CAS. Note I say decision because if there is a claim that the case hasn’t been dealt in accordance with English Law there is a route to take the matter to the High Court . This for me could easily revolve around rules of evidence particularly if that evidence is circumstantial or third party accusations or statements that cant be uncorroborated.
One thing I would advise everyone not to do is get sucked in by journalists or indeed posters who keep on about the inevitable nuclear outcome of ours or indeed Cities cases.
Go back to Masters comments re ours
“Obviously what we're talking about is something historic; it's complicated where we have the club talking to us about things that happened under previous ownership. All I can say is that the investigation and discussions are reaching a conclusion, but until that happens, I can't say what's going to happen next."
“ Say what happens next “ of course that’s non committal but go back to my OP where I talk about the 3 ways in which this matter can proceed.
Bear in mind what we do know and then ask does it sound as if the football bodies will be able to actually prove fraud or concealment ? That will be an underlying concern for the investigations the evidence to support any IC hearing will have to be cogent and if the investigation don’t have full access to records I think this will be a major hurdle to overcome if time limitations aren’t to be applied .Again many will think its obvious it’s provable but it’s no where near a given.
That said we haven’t a clue what the extent of the information the new owners have provided other than it was the same as submitted to UEFA who to be fair concluded their case pretty quickly. I find it inconceivable that matters found during discovery weren’t the subject of discussions between the new owners and UEFA, The PL and The FA prior to the takeover. Those discussions would for me talk about how to deal with this issues and I find it difficult to believe that the retention of £100+ million to settle any issues from RAs time of ownership that were uncovered is a coincidence.
Of course history tells us that the football authorities can and have been draconian when it comes to handing down punishment but that in the main has been the FA. Clubs like Luton and Swindon in particular were hammered . It shouldn’t be dismissed that there is still a possibility that the FA deal with outer case just like they did when Brighton a couple of seasons ago when they reported themselves over incorrect transfer dealings. Incidentally they received a fine.
Perhaps I am being overly optimistic but for me many of the issues disclosed in the data leak ( if they are indeed the same matters reported ) can’t be judged just on face value others would require third parties to be challenged and again if the audit trail isn’t clear then you have to go back to the fact that it is for the authorities to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt not for the new owners to answer any accusations.
Finally I am 100% confident that there will be an appetite within the governing bodies to get our case out the way before the Cities case is put before an IC so again if I were a betting man I expect a resolution in a matter of weeks
That money was in a frozen bank account. Dunno if it's been used, but it's nothing to do with the PL or Chelsea.