Manchester City have formally lodged an appeal against the finding of an independent commission that declared the club guilty of every charge relating to serious breaches of the Premier League's financial regulations. In a press release the club maintained that it is "innocent" and characterised 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 between the 2009/10 and 2017/18 seasons the club had set up what it described as "sham" contracts with several commercial partners.
According to the commission, these arrangements formed part of a "disguised funding scheme" designed to artificially boost Manchester City’s reported revenue by roughly £830 million. The club was given a deadline of Friday to submit an appeal and confirmed that it had done so just before midday on the day in question. In the statement released on Friday, Manchester City 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"; the body that issued the verdict is in fact an independent commission. Manchester City remains a member of the Premier League and is bound by the league’s disciplinary framework.
The three‑person tribunal that produced the judgment spent almost two years drafting its decision. The Premier League’s investigation began eight years ago, and the club was formally charged three and a half years ago. Later on Friday the Premier League confirmed that the club’s appeal had indeed been lodged. The club’s filing indicated that the appeal was addressed to the Chair of the Judicial Panel and that the independent Appeal Board hearing would remain private and confidential until the outcome could be published.
Sky Sports News analyst Kaveh Solhekol explained the timetable: "The appeal was lodged at 7 p.m. on Thursday, and under Premier League rules the appeal must be concluded within 12 weeks, which pushes the deadline into the week before Christmas. The hearing itself can only last five days, and those five days must be taken in a single block.
The appeal panel – which must be a different three‑person panel from the original tribunal – has 30 days to reach a decision, meaning a judgment could be delivered in the third week of January. This is the accelerated timeline introduced into the Premier League rules this season.
Manchester City may argue that this accelerated timeline should not apply because the case has been ongoing for years and the new rule was only introduced this season. That will be a point to watch." Further commentary from Sky Sports News' Lyall Thomas added that the club is likely to argue that the extra funding for its sponsorship deals originated from the Abu Dhabi government rather than from the owners themselves. City’s legal team had previously claimed during the 2024 hearing that the funding came from the Emirate’s government, a contention the independent commission dismissed as a post‑event fabrication intended to conceal the reality of the disguised funding scheme. Nevertheless, the club appears set to continue contesting that finding.
Manchester City is majority‑owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan through Newton Investment and Development LLC. Sheikh Mansour is a member of Abu Dhabi’s ruling family 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 subject of scrutiny and criticism. The commission also expressed regret that its decision took so long to reach, noting that the hearing spanned from September to 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 have a "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence" supporting its position, and pledged to be "relentless and, where necessary, proactive" in pursuing all regulatory and legal avenues. City’s statement again mistakenly referred to a Premier League commission rather than the independent commission. The club stressed 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 noted that it remains limited in what it can publicly disclose until all proceedings are finished. According to Sky Sports News' Kaveh Solhekol and Amar Mehta, the appeal could stretch into the following year if the club argues that the newly introduced speed‑up rules should not apply.
The new appeal rules, introduced this season, require that the disciplinary process be concluded within 12 weeks and that the hearing itself not exceed five days. City’s lawyers may contend that the charges were brought in 2023 and the hearing took place in 2024, before the accelerated rules were codified in the Premier League Handbook. A legal expert told Sky Sports that Manchester City would have a strong argument for exempting itself from the new timetable. The accelerated rules were designed to ensure that clubs are penalised within the same season that breaches occur, thereby promoting timely accountability.
Whether Manchester City’s appeal will be heard under the old or new procedural framework remains to be seen, but the case is poised to continue generating significant attention as both the club and the Premier League navigate this complex legal landscape.