Manchester City have formally lodged an appeal against the finding of an independent commission that declared the club guilty of every charge related to serious violations of the Premier League's financial regulations. In a press release the club reiterated its claim of innocence, describing the commission's opinion as merely an "opinion" riddled with "clear material errors of law, principle and fact" and therefore "unsafe".
The independent commission concluded that, over the period from the 2009/10 season through to 2017/18, Manchester City had entered into a series of so‑called "sham" contracts with several commercial partners. According to the commission, these arrangements formed part of a "disguised funding scheme" designed to artificially boost the club's reported revenue by roughly £830 million.
The ruling, which took almost two years for a three‑person tribunal to draft, follows an investigation that began eight years ago and formal charges that were brought three and a half years ago. City confirmed that the appeal was lodged at 7 p.m.
on Thursday, 1 October 2026, just before the deadline on Friday. The club's statement read: "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 statement mistakenly refers to a "Premier League commission"; in reality the body that issued the opinion is an independent commission, separate from the league's internal governance structures.
Nevertheless, Manchester City remains a Premier League member and is bound by the league's disciplinary framework. According to Sky Sports News correspondent Kaveh Solhekol, the appeal timeline is now governed by new, accelerated rules introduced this season. The appeal must be concluded within twelve weeks of filing, which pushes the deadline to the week before Christmas. The hearing itself may not exceed five days and must be conducted in a single block.
A different three‑person panel from the original tribunal will hear the case, and they have thirty days to deliver a judgment, potentially extending the process into the third week of January. Solhekol noted that City could argue the fast‑track timetable should not apply because the matter has been ongoing for years and the accelerated rules were only adopted recently. Further commentary from Sky Sports News' Lyall Thomas highlighted a key argument the club is expected to raise: that the extra funding for its sponsorship deals originated from the Abu Dhabi government rather than directly from the club's owners. City’s legal team previously argued this point during the 2024 hearing, but the independent commission dismissed it as a post‑hoc explanation concocted to obscure the true nature of the disguised funding scheme.
Despite the rejection, the club appears set to continue contesting the commission's conclusion. Manchester City is majority‑owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan through Newton Investment and Development LLC. Sheikh Mansour is a member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi and serves as the United Arab Emirates' vice‑president and deputy prime minister. The intertwining of state investment and private wealth from the Abu Dhabi royal family has long been a source of debate and criticism, especially in the context of football finance.
The commission also expressed regret that its decision took so long, noting that the hearing spanned from September to December 2024. Following the publication of the guilty verdict, City issued another statement on Tuesday, reiterating disappointment and surprise at the opinion. The club again asserted its innocence, claimed to possess a "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence" supporting its stance, and pledged to pursue all appropriate regulatory and legal avenues. The club 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 also reiterated that it remains restricted from commenting further until all proceedings are complete. Legal experts cited by Sky Sports suggest that City may have a strong case for arguing that the newly introduced appeal timelines should not be applied retroactively. The new rules were designed to ensure clubs are punished within the same season as any breach, but applying them to a case that began well before their adoption could be seen as unfair. In summary, Manchester City has formally appealed the independent commission's finding of serious financial rule breaches, maintaining that the judgment is flawed and that the club acted innocently.
The appeal will be heard by a new three‑person panel under the Premier League's accelerated timetable, and the outcome could be delayed until early next year if the club successfully challenges the applicability of the new rules. The situation remains fluid, with both sides preparing extensive legal arguments as the football world watches closely.