Etihad Airways, the flagship carrier of Abu Dhabi and the chief sponsor of Manchester City since 2009, has announced that it is contemplating legal proceedings against the Premier League. The airline’s decision follows the release of an independent commission’s report that found Manchester City guilty of multiple serious breaches of the league’s financial regulations. The commission concluded that, over the period from the 2009/10 season through to 2017/18, the club had orchestrated a series of fabricated contracts with various commercial partners. These arrangements were described as part of a "disguised funding scheme" designed to artificially boost the club’s reported revenue by roughly £830 million.
The findings have been vehemently rejected by Manchester City’s leadership. Chief executive Ferran Soriano labeled the entire process a "Premier League conspiracy theory" in a video addressed to players and staff, insisting that the club remains innocent of any wrongdoing. In parallel, Etihad issued a strongly worded statement emphasizing that it "categorically rejects any finding, conclusion or implication that suggests the airline has ever been involved in improper commercial arrangements." The carrier also complained that the Premier League failed to engage with it during the investigation, denying Etihad the opportunity to present relevant information or defend its reputation. According to the airline’s statement, the Premier League’s public communication of the commission’s opinion – which was accompanied by a series of selective leaks – has caused "damaging implications" for Etihad, even though the carrier’s name does not appear in the redacted version of the report.
Etihad said it is now seeking legal counsel to explore the options available to protect its interests and to hold the league accountable for what it describes as a lack of transparency and fairness in the handling of the case. The controversy has sparked a broader reaction among City’s commercial partners.
While some sponsors have remained silent, others have issued brief comments. Lucozade, Kellogg’s and Revolut told Sky Sports News they would not comment while the independent commission’s findings are under review. Majestic Wines declined to say whether it will continue its partnership with the club.
Sky Sports is still awaiting responses from a host of other sponsors, including Sure, Durex, EA Sports, CP Company, Britvic, SilentNight, OKX, Gaucho and Champneys. Etihad’s statement also highlighted a factual error in the language used by both the airline and the club: the body that issued the findings is an independent commission, not a Premier League commission. This distinction is significant because it underscores the independence of the investigative process, even as the parties involved accuse the league of mishandling the communication of its conclusions.
Industry commentator Kaveh Solhekol, Sky Sports News’ chief correspondent, provided additional context. He noted that Etihad originally signed a ten‑year, £400 million sponsorship deal with Manchester City in 2011, a contract that has since been extended.
Solhekol explained that the airline’s legal move is a direct response to the commission’s judgment, which labeled several of City’s sponsorship agreements as "sham" deals that did not represent genuine commercial contracts. Although Etihad was not named in the published decision, the airline argues that the implication of involvement in such arrangements has harmed its reputation and business interests. The commission also expressed regret that the investigation took an extended period, with hearings conducted between September and December 2024.
The protracted timeline has added to the frustration of all parties involved, especially given the high stakes for both the club and its sponsors. Manchester City released its own statement on the same day, describing the commission’s opinion as "disappointing and surprising." The club asserted that it possesses a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence supporting its position and that it will pursue all appropriate regulatory and legal avenues. City’s statement emphasized that the club has respected due process for eight years, trusting that the Premier League’s board and executives would act as an independent, impartial regulator. However, the club also noted that it is limited in what it can publicly disclose until all further proceedings are concluded.
The legal tussle between Etihad and the Premier League illustrates the complex interplay between football governance, commercial sponsorship, and corporate reputation. Sponsorship deals in elite sport often involve multi‑year, multi‑million‑pound agreements that go beyond simple advertising; they become intertwined with a club’s brand identity and global outreach. When a club’s financial practices are called into question, sponsors can find themselves unintentionally implicated, even if they were not directly involved in the alleged misconduct.
For Etihad, the stakes are particularly high. The airline’s brand is prominently displayed on the Etihad Stadium, the club’s home ground, and its name is synonymous with Manchester City’s modern identity. Any perception that the airline benefited from or participated in a scheme to inflate revenue could damage its standing with customers, investors, and regulatory bodies. By seeking legal advice, Etihad aims to safeguard its brand equity and ensure that any public narrative accurately reflects its role – or lack thereof – in the alleged financial irregularities.
From the Premier League’s perspective, the situation raises questions about the transparency of its disciplinary processes and the adequacy of communication with third parties affected by its decisions. Critics argue that the league should have engaged with all relevant stakeholders, including sponsors, before releasing a public summary of the commission’s findings.
Failure to do so, they say, can lead to unintended reputational harm and potential legal challenges. The broader football community is watching closely. The outcome of Etihad’s potential legal action could set a precedent for how leagues handle sponsorship disclosures in the future.
It may also influence how clubs negotiate and structure sponsorship contracts, ensuring greater clarity and compliance with financial fair play regulations. As the legal and regulatory battles unfold, Manchester City’s supporters, sponsors, and the wider public will continue to receive updates.
The club has indicated that it will appeal the commission’s opinion on the grounds of material errors in law, principle and fact, describing the decision as "unsafe." Meanwhile, Etihad remains steadfast in its commitment to the partnership, stating that it stands with the club, its supporters, and the broader Etihad community as the dispute proceeds through the appropriate legal channels. The situation underscores the delicate balance between sporting success, financial stewardship, and corporate partnership. While Manchester City strives to maintain its competitive edge on the pitch, it must also navigate the complex legal and reputational challenges that arise off it. Etihad’s potential lawsuit adds another layer to an already intricate saga, one that will likely shape the relationship between football clubs and their sponsors for years to come.