What has been said and what next in Man City’s legal battle with Premier League?

The Premier League has been accused by Manchester City of misleading its clubs as a row over a judgement on rules governing commercial deals intensified.

Here, the PA news agency takes a closer look.

What has happened?

Manchester City wrote to the other 19 top-flight clubs and the Premier League on Monday night to provide “clarifications” to a summary published by the league earlier in the day. The summary was the league’s analysis of a judgement arising from City’s challenge to the Premier League’s associated party transaction (APT) rules.

City said the league’s summary was “misleading” and contained “several inaccuracies”.

Most significantly, City’s general counsel Simon Cliff challenged the league’s assertion that the club had been unsuccessful in the majority of their challenge to the rules. Instead, City said all the APT rules were now void because the panel found them unlawful in certain respects.

City called for “careful reflection” on the rules rather than a “kneejerk reaction” to amend them, warning that doing so risked a further legal challenge.

What has the Premier League said?

The league declined to respond directly to City’s email but it is understood it stands by Monday’s summary and rejects any suggestion it is either misleading or inaccurate in any way.

Sources close to the league also pointed out that a meeting of clubs called for October 17 will be to discuss the implications of the panel judgement, not to vote through amendments to the APT rules.

Where does this leave us?

In a pretty messy situation. On the one hand the Premier League believes the rules can be quickly and effectively remedied, and said in its summary that it would continue to operate the existing APT system.

City disagree emphatically and say the whole system is now void.

On top of that clubs must now consider how shareholder loans can be incorporated into the APT rules, which the panel said they must be in order for the rules to be compliant.

Can assessments of whether such loans were issued at fair market value be done retrospectively, or will the rules only apply to new loans?

So are City right that the rules are all void?

Simon Leaf, the head of sports law at Mishcon De Reya, says City are “technically” right but told the PA news agency: “Ultimately it is not going to take much to fix the rules and bring them up to scratch, but it will need the willingness of a majority of 14 clubs to vote through that change.

“Ultimately, City are right that they have won on elements of the case but also the Premier League is right because the body of rules as a whole, and the principles behind the rules more importantly, have been shown to be lawful. (The Premier League) just hasn’t gone as far as they should have done in implementing the rules.”