Etihad Airways, the flagship carrier of the United Arab Emirates and the primary sponsor of Manchester City since 2009, has announced that it is evaluating the possibility of initiating legal proceedings against the Premier League. This development follows the recent verdict delivered by an independent commission, which found Manchester City guilty of multiple serious violations of the league's financial regulations. The commission’s investigation covered the period from the 2009/10 season through to 2017/18. Its findings concluded that the club had orchestrated a series of so‑called "sham" contracts with several 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 purpose of the scheme, according to the commission, was to circumvent the financial fair play rules that govern spending and revenue reporting in English football. Manchester City has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Club chief executive Ferran Soriano dismissed the findings as a "Premier League conspiracy theory" in a video address directed at players and staff.
The club maintains that the allegations are unfounded and that it will vigorously contest the decision through all available regulatory and legal channels. Etihad Airways, which has been closely linked to the club for more than a decade, issued a strongly worded statement rejecting any implication that it was involved in improper commercial practices. The airline emphasized that it was never named in the published judgment, yet it has suffered "damaging implications" as a result of the public disclosure.
Etihad further complained that the Premier League failed to engage with the airline during the commission’s proceedings, denying it the opportunity to submit relevant information or to defend its reputation. "Etihad categorically rejects any finding, conclusion or implication that suggests the airline has ever been involved in improper commercial arrangements," the statement read. "The Premier League’s public communication of the commission’s findings, following a period of selective leaks and reporting, has further created damaging implications for Etihad despite the airline not being named in the redacted published findings." The carrier added that it is now seeking legal counsel to explore options for protecting its interests.
It highlighted the lack of transparency and the selective disclosure of information as key concerns, arguing that the Premier League should take responsibility for the negative impact the announcement has had on Etihad’s brand. Other sponsors of Manchester City have largely remained silent. Lucozade, Kellogg’s and Revolut declined to comment while the appeal process is ongoing. Majestic Wines said it would not comment on whether it intends to continue its partnership with the club.
Sky Sports News reported that it is still awaiting responses from a number of other partners, including Sure, Durex, EA Sports, CP Company, Britvic, SilentNight, OKX, Gaucho and Champneys. Sky Sports’ chief correspondent Kaveh Solhekol provided additional context, noting that the original sponsorship agreement between Etihad and Manchester City was a ten‑year deal signed in 2011, reportedly worth £400 million and subsequently extended.
He explained that Etihad’s decision to consider legal action stems from the commission’s judgment, which labeled several of the club’s sponsorship deals as "sham" contracts that did not reflect genuine commercial transactions. "Etihad has released a very strongly worded statement, and in it they say they are seeking legal advice to protect their interests," Solhekol said.
"The judgment from the independent commission said that Manchester City's owners had been inflating their sponsorship income, and that some of City's sponsorship deals were 'sham' deals that weren't real contracts." The independent commission also expressed regret over the length of time it took to reach a decision, noting that the hearings spanned from September to December 2024. Manchester City responded with its own statement, describing the commission’s opinion as both "disappointing and surprising" and asserting that the club possesses a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence supporting its position. "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," the club’s statement read.
"Manchester City will therefore be relentless, and where necessary proactive, in any and all appropriate regulatory and legal forums." Both Etihad and Manchester City highlighted procedural concerns. Etihad argued that it was never consulted during the commission’s inquiry, while the club stressed that it had respected due process for eight years, trusting that the Premier League would act as an independent, impartial regulator free from partisan influence. The situation underscores a broader tension between football clubs, their commercial partners, and governing bodies over financial transparency and the enforcement of fair‑play rules. As the legal and regulatory battles unfold, the outcomes could have significant ramifications not only for Manchester City’s financial reporting but also for the future of sponsorship arrangements in the sport.
Etihad’s potential legal challenge may set a precedent for how sponsors can respond when they feel unjustly implicated in investigations they were not directly involved in. Regardless of the final verdict, the episode has already sparked intense debate among fans, analysts, and industry observers about the balance between competitive ambition, financial regulation, and the rights of commercial partners. The next steps will likely involve formal appeals by Manchester City, possible court proceedings by Etihad, and continued scrutiny from the Premier League as it seeks to maintain the integrity of its financial governance framework.