Manchester City have formally lodged an appeal against the decision of an independent commission that found the club guilty of every charge relating to serious breaches of Premier League financial regulations. In a press release the club reiterated its claim of innocence, describing the commission's opinion as merely an "opinion" that is riddled with "clear material errors of law, principle and fact" and therefore "unsafe". The commission’s investigation concluded that, between the 2009/10 and 2017/18 seasons, Manchester City had orchestrated a series of so‑called "sham" contracts with a number of commercial partners.
According to the report, these arrangements formed part of a "disguised funding scheme" designed to artificially boost the club’s reported revenue by roughly £830 million. The findings were presented in a detailed judgment that took almost two years for the three‑person tribunal to draft, following a Premier League investigation that began eight years ago and formal charges that were laid three and a half years ago. City’s statement, issued just before midday on the deadline day, confirmed that the appeal had been filed at 7 p.m.
on Thursday, 1 October 2026. The club said: "Manchester City Football Club can confirm that at 7 p.m. on Thursday 1 October 2026 the club lodged its comprehensive appeal against the opinion of the Premier League Commission, in relation to the Premier League disciplinary matter.
The club's firm position is that, on multiple grounds, the opinion contains clear material errors of law, principle and fact and is unsafe. The club is innocent of the accusations made by the Premier League and a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence exists in support of all of its positions, relating to this case. We will continue to respect due process and are necessarily restricted in what we can say further until all proceedings are complete." The wording in the statement mistakenly refers to a "Premier League commission" when the body that issued the verdict is in fact an independent commission. Manchester City remain a member of the Premier League and have signed up to the league’s disciplinary framework, which obliges clubs to accept the outcomes of such independent investigations.
Later on Friday the Premier League confirmed that the club’s appeal had indeed been lodged. The league added that the appeal was directed to the Chair of the Judicial Panel and that the subsequent hearing before the independent Appeal Board would be held in private, with any outcome only published when permitted.
Sky Sports News analyst Kaveh Solhekol explained the procedural timetable: "The appeal was lodged on Thursday at 7 p.m., and under the Premier League’s rules the appeal must be concluded within 12 weeks, which pushes the deadline to the week before Christmas. The hearing itself can only last five days, and those five days must be taken in a single block.
A new three‑person panel, different from the original tribunal, will have up to 30 days after the hearing to deliver its judgment, which means a decision could be issued in the third week of January. This accelerated timeline was introduced in the Premier League handbook this season. Manchester City may argue that the new, speeded‑up timetable should not apply to them because their case has been ongoing for years and the rule change only came into effect this season." Further commentary from Sky Sports News’ Lyall Thomas noted that the club is likely to argue that the extra funding attributed to its sponsorship deals originated from the Abu Dhabi government rather than from the private owners.
During the 2024 hearing, City’s legal team presented this argument, but the independent commission dismissed it, stating that the explanation was concocted after the fact in an attempt to conceal the realities of the disguised funding scheme. Nevertheless, the club is expected to continue contesting that finding. Manchester City is majority‑owned by Newton Investment and Development LLC, a vehicle controlled by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
Sheikh Mansour is a member of the ruling Al Nahyan family of Abu Dhabi and serves as the United Arab Emirates’ vice‑president and deputy prime minister. The intertwining of state investment from the UAE and private capital linked to the Abu Dhabi royal family has long been a point of debate and criticism among observers of football finance. The commission also expressed regret that the process had taken so long, with the hearing taking place between September and December 2024. After the guilty verdict was published, Manchester City issued a statement on Tuesday saying it was both "disappointed and surprised" by the commission’s opinion.
The club reiterated its innocence, claimed to possess a "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence" supporting its position, and vowed to be "relentless and, where necessary, proactive" in pursuing all appropriate regulatory and legal avenues. City’s statement again mistakenly referred to a "Premier League commission" rather than an independent commission. The club also emphasized that it had respected due process for eight years, trusting that the Premier League board and executive would act as an independent, impartial regulator free from partisan influence. It noted that it remains constrained in what it can say publicly until all proceedings are concluded.
Looking ahead, the appeal could extend into the next calendar year if Manchester City successfully argues that the newly introduced speeded‑up appeal rules should not apply to a case that predates them. Under the current rules, the disciplinary process must be wrapped up within 12 weeks, and the appeal hearing cannot exceed five days.
However, a legal expert quoted by Sky Sports News suggested that City has a strong case for claiming that the rules, which were only added to the Premier League handbook this season, should not be retroactively imposed on a matter that began years earlier. The new rules were designed to ensure clubs face sanctions within the same season that breaches occur, thereby increasing transparency and deterrence. Whether Manchester City’s appeal will succeed, and whether the league will accept the argument that the procedural changes should not affect this long‑running case, remains to be seen. The outcome will be closely watched by football administrators, fans, and financial regulators alike, as it could set a precedent for how future financial compliance disputes are handled in the Premier League.