Etihad Airways, the flagship carrier of Abu Dhabi and the chief sponsor of Manchester City since 2009, has announced that it is weighing the possibility of pursuing legal proceedings against the Premier League. This development follows the recent verdict by an independent commission, which concluded that Manchester City had breached the league’s financial regulations in a series of serious offences. The commission’s investigation covered the period from the 2009/10 season through to 2017/18. Its findings allege that the club engaged in a systematic scheme of "sham" sponsorship contracts with several commercial partners.
According to the report, these contracts were part of a "disguised funding" arrangement designed to artificially boost the club’s revenue figures by roughly £830 million. The commission described the practice as a deliberate attempt to circumvent the Premier League’s Financial Fair Play rules, thereby gaining an unfair competitive advantage.
Manchester City has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Club chief executive Ferran Soriano dismissed the findings as a "Premier League conspiracy theory" in a video addressed to players and staff, insisting that the club has acted within the rules.
Nevertheless, the independent commission’s judgment has triggered a cascade of reactions from the club’s commercial partners. Etihad Airways issued a strongly worded statement rejecting any implication that it was involved in improper commercial dealings. The airline stressed that it was never named in the published judgment, yet the decision has nonetheless created "damaging implications" for its brand. Etihad complained that the Premier League failed to engage with the airline during the investigative process, denying it the opportunity to provide relevant information or to defend its reputation.
As a result, the carrier is now seeking legal counsel to explore options for protecting its interests and to potentially challenge the way the findings have been communicated to the public. The statement from Etihad also highlighted a broader concern about transparency. It accused the Premier League of selective leaks and incomplete disclosure, which the airline says have unfairly tarnished its image despite the absence of any direct mention in the redacted report.
Etihad reiterated its long‑standing partnership with Manchester City, noting that the Etihad name has been proudly displayed on the club’s stadium and that the relationship has connected the airline with millions of football fans worldwide. The carrier affirmed its continued commitment to the club, its supporters, and the wider Etihad community, while simultaneously signalling its intention to pursue legal recourse if necessary. Other sponsors of Manchester City have responded with varying degrees of caution.
Lucozade, Kellogg’s and Revolut have declined to comment on the commission’s findings while the appeal process is ongoing. Majestic Wines has refused to say whether it will maintain its commercial tie‑up with the club. Sky Sports News reported that it is still awaiting responses from a host of other partners, including Sure, Durex, EA Sports, CP Company, Britvic, SilentNight, OKX, Gaucho and Champneys. The independent commission also expressed regret that the decision took an extended period to reach, noting that the hearing spanned from September to December 2024.
The delay, according to the commission, added to the uncertainty surrounding the case and amplified the impact on all parties involved. Manchester City issued its own statement on the same day the judgment was published. The club described itself as "disappointed and surprised" by the commission’s opinion, asserting that it is innocent of the accusations and that a substantial body of irrefutable evidence supports its position. City pledged to be "relentless and, where necessary, proactive" in defending itself through all appropriate regulatory and legal channels.
The club emphasized that it has respected due process for eight years, trusting that the Premier League’s board and executive would act as an independent and impartial regulator. However, it also warned that further public comments would be limited until all future proceedings are concluded.
The situation underscores a broader tension between football clubs, their commercial partners, and governing bodies over financial transparency and regulatory enforcement. While the Premier League maintains that its independent commission acted within its remit to safeguard the integrity of the competition, sponsors like Etihad argue that they were unfairly implicated by association, despite not being directly named in the findings.
The potential legal showdown could set a precedent for how third‑party sponsors are treated in future investigations involving alleged financial misconduct. Legal experts suggest that any challenge by Etihad would likely focus on procedural fairness, the right to be heard, and the alleged lack of communication from the Premier League during the investigation. If successful, such a challenge could force the league to revise its investigative protocols, ensuring that all parties affected by a commission’s findings are given an opportunity to respond before conclusions are made public. For fans and observers, the dispute adds another layer of drama to an already contentious saga surrounding Manchester City’s financial practices.
The club’s supporters, who have enjoyed years of success on the pitch, now face a period of uncertainty off it, as the appeal process unfolds and the legal arguments develop. Whether Etihad proceeds with formal legal action or reaches a settlement with the Premier League remains to be seen, but the episode highlights the intricate web of relationships that underpin modern football, where commercial interests, regulatory bodies, and sporting performance intersect in complex and often contentious ways.