Manchester City verdict: 10 key questions over appeal, penalties and compensation claims

After eight years of proceedings, an independent commission has found Manchester City guilty of all the serious financial-rule charges brought against the club over a nine-season period, as well as most of the allegations that it failed to co-operate with the investigation.

The Premier League said the commission concluded that City used “sham” contracts to inflate income and reduce costs by more than £900m between the 2009-10 and 2017-18 seasons. The club was also found to have submitted inaccurate accounts and concealed its true financial position from auditors and regulators.

Manchester City deny the allegations and intend to appeal. The Daily Mail has set out the main questions raised by the verdict.

When will the next stage begin?

Friday is the deadline for Manchester City to lodge its appeal. The move is expected because the club has consistently rejected the charges, while chief executive Ferran Soriano has confirmed it will challenge the ruling.

Premier League rules limit the appeal hearing to five days, require it to be completed within 12 weeks of the original decision and restrict witness and expert submissions to 30 pages.

The first potential delay could come with the formation of a new appeal panel. The current panel’s chair must notify the parties of the proposed members “as soon as reasonably practicable”, after which objections can be submitted within two working days. Legal experts believe a final outcome is unlikely during the current season.

The Premier League has not said whether any punishment would be imposed before the appeal ends, although there are indications it wants the process to move quickly.

What happens to witnesses accused of giving false evidence?

Paragraph 29(b) of the published judgment says: “Some of the factual witnesses gave evidence at the hearing which they knew to be untrue and were therefore dishonest.”

The individuals, who gave evidence on behalf of Manchester City, have not been named. The Premier League appears to be seeking permission to publish parts of the ruling that remain redacted. It said on Tuesday that it had only been authorised to release a revised version of the panel’s “key findings”.

The league said the proceedings remain ongoing and that unpublished information is confidential, but promised to publish the full decision “unless prevented from doing so by law”.

The identities of the panel members have also not been disclosed. The Premier League says the process is continuing and further material could be released later, depending on legal arguments made during the proceedings.

Could there be criminal prosecutions?

That remains undecided. Both sides are currently focused on the appeal, and there is no clear equivalent precedent in England.

In Italy, former Juventus officials, including former president Andrea Agnelli, received suspended prison sentences in a case involving financial accounts. Agnelli was sentenced to 20 months, while former Juventus sporting director Fabio Paratici, who was Tottenham’s football director at the time, received a 14-month sentence.

Could rival clubs seek compensation?

Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham and Liverpool have lodged legal claims to protect their position if Manchester City is found liable, including claims that the club’s alleged breaches denied rivals European qualification.

Tottenham may have a particularly strong argument. It finished one place outside the Champions League qualification positions in four seasons between 2009 and 2018, with City above them. Its potential claim has been estimated at about £200m.

Claims could also cover indirect losses, such as a club being unable to sign a player of a particular standard because of its financial or sporting position.

An independent arbitration panel would likely determine compensation, as happened when Burnley received £35m from Everton in June last year for breaching profitability and sustainability rules. The four claims could be heard together to save time, although each club may prefer a separate case.

It is considered highly unlikely that compensation payments would affect City’s future financial accounts, as that could create a cycle of further breaches and amount to double punishment.

Could UEFA reopen the case?

UEFA will wait for the full outcome before deciding whether to act. However, according to the Daily Mail, reopening the case is highly unlikely.

The Premier League said City had been in “significant breach” of both its own rules and UEFA regulations. But the Court of Arbitration for Sport overturned City’s two-year ban from European competitions in 2020, upholding some UEFA findings while rejecting others as time-barred. City were fined €10m, but the ban was removed.

Can the Premier League investigate accounts after 2018?

In theory, yes. The wider question is whether the league would want to begin another investigation after the time, effort and cost involved in the current case.

For now, there is a feeling within the Premier League that the verdict validates its position. That confidence is expected to increase if City lose the appeal.

What if City are relegated?

The English Football League has not commented, but rule 11.6.2 appears to address such circumstances.

If a points deduction sent City only to the Championship, the club would simply enter the second tier. If the punishment resulted in relegation to League Two, the situation would be more complicated.

City would first have to apply to The Football Association to re-enter the English football pyramid. If approved, one additional team would be promoted from each EFL division in the following season to fill the vacancies created by City’s absence from the Premier League.

What does the verdict mean for Omar Berrada?

Moroccan businessman Omar Berrada is now chief executive of Manchester United. He joined the club in 2024 from Manchester City, where he had held several executive positions since 2011, including chief operating officer.

Manchester United declined to comment. However, it would be difficult to imagine that the club did not carry out appropriate due diligence before appointing Berrada, particularly as the charges against City had been made public almost a year earlier.

For now, the verdict is not the end of the matter. City have until Friday to appeal, the final punishment has not been announced, and the possible sanctions range from fines and points deductions to measures with a greater effect on the club’s league status. Rival claims and any action by UEFA or other bodies remain separate matters that could develop later.