Manchester City hit by fresh UEFA appeal setback

Manchester City’s fight to overturn their conviction in the Premier League’s 115-charge case has suffered another twist. Fresh reports suggest evidence the club previously submitted to UEFA could undercut a key part of its defence, adding more pressure ahead of the appeal process.

Another complication for City’s defence

The club was found guilty last week of 114 breaches relating to the period between 2009 and 2018, in a case centred on allegations that City used “sham” sponsorship arrangements to inflate revenues by around £900 million. City have denied any wrongdoing and insist they have conclusive evidence to support their position.

An independent three-person panel will now hear the appeal, with a decision expected before the end of the year. But the latest reports indicate that City’s legal argument may be facing a more difficult path than before.

What City’s defence is built on

At the heart of the club’s case is the claim that the disputed sponsorship money came from the UAE government rather than from the club’s owners through Abu Dhabi United Group for Investment, commonly known as ADUG. Under Premier League regulations, state-owned entities can sponsor clubs, a point City are believed to be relying on strongly.

That stance has now been complicated by earlier evidence cited in multiple reports. Etihad Airways, City’s main sponsor, reportedly told US authorities in 2015 that claims the UAE government was covering the cost of sponsorship deals were false. That statement has already raised questions around the club’s version of events.

Fresh reports raise new questions

According to The Times, material City submitted to UEFA more than six years ago may further weaken the club’s position. The report says City told UEFA that two payments of £15 million each, made in 2012 and 2013, were paid by Jaber Mohamed, who is described as the general manager of the court of the UAE crown prince.

The crucial issue, according to the report, is that City did not inform UEFA of the link between Jaber Mohamed and the crown prince’s court. Instead, the club said only that “the payment was made on the instruction of Abu Dhabi United Group for Investment.”

That omission is now being scrutinised because it goes directly to the central question in the case: who actually funded the sponsorship arrangements? If the payments were not presented to UEFA with full context, that could become a significant issue for City in the appeal.

Why the evidence matters now

The case has become more than a question of football finance. It is now a test of how City’s sponsorship structure was presented to regulators over many years, and whether the evidence they submitted aligns with their current defence.

“This is not just about the money, it is about how that money was described,” one legal observer told reporters, summing up why the newly surfaced material could be so damaging. The appeal panel will be looking closely at whether the club’s submissions were consistent and complete.

Etihad’s past statement adds to the pressure

The latest reports also revive attention on Etihad Airways’ own 2015 statement to the US Department of Commerce, Transportation and State. In that filing, the airline denied claims that the Abu Dhabi government had funded the sponsorship deals, saying it had never received financial support from the government and that its funding came through capital, loans and commercial arrangements.

Etihad argued that shareholder capital and loans were not financial support under the relevant definitions, framing them instead as normal tools of commercial investment. While that explanation may have suited one context, it now sits uneasily alongside City’s broader defence in the Premier League case.

City continue to deny the charges and are expected to press ahead with their appeal. But with contradictory evidence now in the public domain, the club faces an increasingly awkward legal and reputational battle.

What happens next

The appeal will now be examined by an independent panel, and the outcome could shape not only Manchester City’s immediate future but also the wider conversation around financial rules in English football. With the decision due before the end of the year, the pressure is only likely to intensify.

For City, the key task is clear: prove that the evidence supports their version of events. For everyone else, the question is whether the latest reports have exposed a serious flaw in a defence that was already under enormous strain.