Manchester City has secured a major victory in their legal battle with the Premier League, as the rules of the administrative body around the sponsorship were declared “invalid and inappropriate”, according to Times.
An independent court ruled in October that the rules around party -related transactions – which impose between 2021 and 2024 – were illegal in three areas.
The Premier League amended these three laws in November – supported by 16 of its 20 members – but the city has questioned APT’s validity as a whole and the argument of English champions has been monitored.
Breaking: Man City scores great victory as Premier League sponsorship ruleshttps://t.co/vhyshznkm3
– Matt Lawton (@lawton_times) 14 February 2025
According to the Times, who claim to have seen the verdict of the Independent Court of Justice consisting of three higher legal elements in Sir Nigel Teare, Lord Dyson and Christopher Vajda KC, the final prize was read: “In the first partial final award stated that the APT rules and the amended APT rules were illegal in three respects.
“There, now the decision arises for the decision whether these three views can be eliminated by the remaining rules, so that these remain appropriate rules are valid and enforceable.
“The three views in which APT rules and amended APT rules were illegal cannot be cut off, so the APT rules as a whole are invalid and non -applicable.”
Manchester City and Newcastle could benefit
The rules around APT were introduced to prevent the clubs from inflating the value of sponsorship agreements with the relevant parts. The court’s verdict could allow those who like the city, the majority of Abu Dhabi, and Newcastle, which belongs to the majority of the Saudi Arabian public investment fund, to achieve new agreements.
The Times reports that Premier League CEO Richard Masters wrote in its clubs today and tried to play the importance of the court ruling.
In the letter, Masters allegedly admitted that the previous rules were invalid and were not elected, but stressed that “the new rules were voted in force”.
