When will Man City be punished for 115 charges? Not yet, and probably not soon. On 25 September 2026 the Athletic reported, and BBC Sport's sources confirmed, that the independent commission hearing the Premier League's case has found Manchester City guilty of the vast majority of the charges, with 114 of the 115 counts upheld according to the Athletic. No punishment has been set: a separate sanctions hearing must still take place, the Premier League has made no announcement, and City, who deny wrongdoing, are expected to appeal. This analysis sets out what has actually been decided, what the Premier League Rules say about sanctions, appeals and arbitration, how rival clubs could seek compensation, and where the new Independent Football Regulator fits in, for the lawyers, club executives, sponsors and investors who now have to plan around the most important disciplinary case in English football.
What the commission has reportedly decided
The short answer is that a guilty finding on most of the charges has been reported and not denied, but it has not been published. BBC Sport reported that the independent panel has ruled and that the majority of the charges have been upheld. The news was broken by the Athletic, which reported that 114 of the 115 counts were upheld. The decision came 1,327 days after City were charged in February 2023, and 22 months after the hearing ended.
Several points of detail matter for anyone advising on the case:
- No official confirmation. The Premier League has declined to comment. A spokesperson told The National: "It's a confidential process, we're not commenting at all." The Guardian noted that there is not even official confirmation that the three-person panel has reached a verdict, although neither party has denied the reports.
- Clubs have seen the decision. According to BBC Sport, a select group of directors at other Premier League clubs were informed by email and had to sign a non-disclosure agreement before they could read the document.
- The failed count is not public. Which single count, if any, was not upheld has not been made public, and the commission's written reasons have not been released.
- The number of charges is disputed. The figure of 115 is the total of the alleged breaches listed in the Premier League's 2023 announcement. BBC Sport notes suggestions from the Times and football finance expert Kieran Maguire that the true number is as high as 130, which it has been unable to verify.
The panel's members have not been named. BBC Sport reports that their identities will only emerge once a written judgment is released. Until then, everything about the reasoning, including how the commission treated the club's evidence and which findings it made on dishonesty, remains unknown.
What were the 115 charges?
The charges fall into five groups covering the seasons 2009/10 to 2017/18, plus a separate allegation of failing to co-operate that runs from December 2018 to February 2023. The Premier League's statement of 6 February 2023 referred the alleged breaches to an independent commission under Rule W.3.4, and said the commission's final award would be published on the league's website.
| Category of charge | Counts | Period |
|---|---|---|
| Failure to provide accurate financial information | 54 | 2009/10 to 2017/18 |
| Failure to provide accurate details of player and manager payments | 14 | 2009/10 to 2017/18 |
| Failure to comply with UEFA rules, including Financial Fair Play | 5 | 2013/14 to 2017/18 |
| Breach of Premier League Profitability and Sustainability Rules | 7 | 2015/16 to 2017/18 |
| Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations | 35 | December 2018 to February 2023 |
The breakdown above is the one published by BBC Sport. At the heart of the case, according to BBC Sport, are allegations that City inflated sponsorship revenue from connected companies and made "off the books" payments to get around football's financial rules. The Premier League alleged breaches of the rule requiring a club to provide "accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club's financial position". The allegations first surfaced in 2018 in the German magazine Der Spiegel, based on leaked emails. City have always denied wrongdoing and say their case is supported by a "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence".
The hearing ran from 16 September to 6 December 2024 before a three-person commission at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in London, Sky Sports reported. City won eight trophies in the period covered, including three Premier League titles, three League Cups, one FA Cup and one Community Shield.
When will Man City be punished for 115 charges?
Man City will not be punished until the commission has held a separate sanctions hearing, and that hearing has not yet taken place. BBC Sport reports that it "could take months". Under the rules, liability and penalty are decided in two stages. Rule W.54 of the Premier League Rules (2025/26 Handbook) provides that once the commission finds a complaint proved, it must invite the Board and the respondent club to put any mitigating and aggravating factors before it. Only then does it choose a sanction.
The order in which things become public is also uncertain. BBC Sport has been told that the punishment decided by the panel is expected to be released before any appeal is completed, although it also reports that it remains possible the sanction will not be made public until after an appeal. The Guardian reports that any appeal City bring now would be against the finding itself, since no punishment has yet been set.
On publication, the rules are clear in principle. Rule W.87.3 says final awards of any commission or Appeal Board "shall be confirmed publicly and published on the League's website", with reasonable prior notice to the parties. The Guardian cautions, however, that the scale of this case has meant normal procedures have not always been followed, and the date on which written reasons will be published is not known. Rule numbering in the handbook changes from season to season, and the version applicable to a case brought in 2023 may number some provisions differently; the Guardian, for example, cites the finality rule as W.97, where the 2025/26 Handbook has it at W.84.
For planning purposes, the realistic answer to the question of when City will be punished is: not before a sanctions hearing, and quite possibly not with final effect until the appeal, and any arbitration after it, has run its course.
What sanctions can the commission impose?
The commission has an unusually wide discretion because the Premier League has no fixed tariff for financial breaches. Sky Sports reports that clubs chose not to adopt set sanctions, for fear that some would break the rules and simply accept a known penalty; Premier League chief executive Richard Masters said in February 2025 that the league was looking at a "sanctions grid", but it is not in place. The menu in Rule W.55 therefore does most of the work.
| Power under Rule W.55 | What it allows |
|---|---|
| W.55.1 | A reprimand |
| W.55.2 | A fine "unlimited in amount", which may be partly suspended |
| W.55.4.1 | Suspension of the club from playing League matches for such period as the commission thinks fit |
| W.55.4.2 | Deduction of points "scored or to be scored" |
| W.55.4.4 | A recommendation that the League expel the club from membership |
| W.55.5 | An order to pay compensation, unlimited in amount, to any person or club |
| W.55.7 and W.55.8 | Any combination of these, "or such other penalty as it shall think fit", and conditional penalties |
| W.55.9 | An order to pay costs |
BBC Sport reports that being found guilty on the most serious charges means City could be looking at a points deduction serious enough to relegate them, large fines or even expulsion. It notes that removal from the league would mean City losing their membership and being demoted at the end of the season.
The precedents are small by comparison. Everton were deducted six points (reduced from ten on appeal) and then two points in 2023/24, and Nottingham Forest four, each for a single Profitability and Sustainability breach. Chelsea were fined £10m and given a suspended transfer ban after admitting £47m in secret payments, a self-reported case settled with the league. In the EFL, Luton Town lost 30 points in 2008/09 and Derby County 21 in 2021/22. City's case is different in kind: it is a contested case, spread over nine seasons, including failure to co-operate. Unlike the EU competition regime, where cartel fines follow published guidelines, the commission here has no formula to apply, which is one reason commentators decline to predict the outcome with any confidence.
Can Man City be stripped of Premier League titles?
It cannot be ruled out, but it is not the most likely outcome. BBC Sport has been told there has been little appetite within the Premier League, both the organisation and the clubs, for past titles to be stripped. The rules do not expressly list stripping titles as a sanction, but they do allow the commission to impose a penalty "as it shall think fit", which in theory could include retrospective points deductions or the removal of titles. A points deduction, a very large fine or expulsion are thought more likely.
There are precedents outside the Premier League. Juventus had the Serie A titles of 2005 and 2006 revoked after the Calciopoli scandal: the first was left unassigned and the second was awarded to Inter Milan. The BBC also points to cycling, where Lance Armstrong lost seven Tour de France titles in 2012.
The counter-arguments are practical as much as legal. Rewriting results raises questions about which seasons are affected, whether later success built on the same foundations should be touched, and whether players and supporters with no part in any breach should lose honours. Former City midfielder Rodri, now at Barcelona, told reporters at Wembley on 25 September that "what we did, they cannot take out of us" and that "everything was deserved", according to BBC Sport. The BBC's assessment is that compensation claims by rival clubs are more likely than any stripping of titles.
How does the Man City appeal work?
The Man City appeal would go to a new three-member Appeal Board, and it must be started within 14 days of the decision being appealed. Section W of the Premier League Rules sets out the procedure, and BBC Sport has been told the club will appeal. Either side can appeal: Rule W.66 allows the club to challenge the commission's decision "including the relief, order, measure or sanction imposed", and allows the Premier League Board to do the same.
- Time limit. Under Rule W.71 the appeal is commenced by sending Form 22 to the Chair of the Judicial Panel "so that it is received within 14 days of the date of the decision appealed against (time being of the essence)". Rule W.73 allows that period to be shortened where there is a compelling reason for the appeal to be dealt with more quickly.
- Who decides. Rule W.67 provides for an Appeal Board of three members of the Appeals Panel, appointed by the Chair of the Judicial Panel, one of whom must have held judicial office and sits as chair. Sky Sports reports that the Chair of the Judicial Panel is Sir Gary Hickinbottom.
- A review, not a retrial. Rule W.79 makes the appeal a review of the evidence before the commission, with oral representations. New evidence is allowed under Rule W.75 only if it was not available and could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence at the time.
- Wide powers. Under Rule W.83 the Appeal Board may allow or dismiss the appeal, vary any penalty or compensation order, send the matter back to the commission, award costs, or "make such other order as it thinks fit".
- Confidentiality. The proceedings are confidential and heard in private, subject to the publication rules in W.87.
On timing, the Guardian reports that the appeal process should be completed in less than 12 weeks, with a hearing in one block of no more than five days and a verdict expected within 30 days of it. Those are indicative timescales reported by the newspaper, and the case has repeatedly overrun expectations. City's legal team is led by Lord Pannick KC, BBC Sport reports, who helped overturn the club's UEFA ban in 2020. Disputes of this scale typically require specialist dispute resolution and litigation counsel on every side, including for clubs that may later seek compensation. For comparison with how an EU court handles a challenge to a regulator's penalty, see our analysis of the appeal against the European Commission's fine on X.
Can City go to arbitration or the Court of Arbitration for Sport?
City cannot take the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, according to BBC Sport and Sky Sports. That matters because it was at CAS that the club overturned UEFA's two-year European ban in July 2020. As BBC Sport reported at the time, CAS cleared City of "disguising equity funds as sponsorship contributions" and cut the fine from €30m to €10m, finding that most alleged breaches were either not established or time-barred. Sky Sports notes that the Premier League has no equivalent limitation period, which is why its charges go back to 2009.
Instead, Rule W.84 provides that the Appeal Board's decision is final "subject to the provisions of Section X (Arbitration)". Section X is a narrow safety valve, not a second appeal. Under Rule X.4, the only grounds for reviewing a commission or Appeal Board decision by arbitration are that it was reached outside the body's jurisdiction; as a result of fraud, malice or bad faith; through procedural errors so great that the applicant's rights were clearly and substantially prejudiced; through a perverse interpretation of the law; or was one that no body applying its mind properly to the facts could reasonably have reached.
Rule X.2 makes England and Wales the seat of any such arbitration and English law the governing law, which brings in the supervisory jurisdiction of the English courts under the Arbitration Act. Why the seat, rather than the hearing venue, decides which courts can intervene is explained in our guide to the seat and venue of an arbitration. City have used this route before: the Guardian notes that the club's challenge to the associated party transaction rules went through arbitration and ended in settlement.
How Manchester City have responded
City have neither confirmed nor denied the reported verdict, but they have made clear they will fight. The club's statement on 25 September said: "The Premier League process remains ongoing, with significant elements to be completed, and subject to strict confidentiality." It added that the club "has diligently respected due process for eight years on the basis that the Premier League Board and Executive would behave as an independent, impartial and fair-minded regulator, free from partisan influence."
On 26 September chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak published an open letter to supporters on the club's website. As reported by The National, he wrote that "the Premier League process still has a long way to run, and our confidence and intent in proving the club's innocence is just as strong as when this began." He said the strict confidentiality of the process prevented him saying more, adding that "even this letter underwent several legal checks to make sure it complies", and that "nothing has changed". The letter pointed supporters to the club's February 2023 statement, which said it welcomed review by an independent commission "to impartially consider the comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence that exists in support of its position."
Others have reacted cautiously. According to BBC Sport, Prime Minister Andy Burnham told ITV Granada that people should "study" the independent commission's report "in some considerable detail before reaching any conclusions". Former City chairman David Bernstein told BBC Radio 4 that he expected the penalty "will have to be a severe one" and that it "would be a travesty if the appeal process is allowed to go on for years". City's owners are based in Abu Dhabi, and the BBC reports suggestions that relations between the United Arab Emirates and the UK could come under pressure, a reminder that owner-side advice from advisers in the United Arab Emirates will be as relevant as English counsel.
Can rival clubs sue Man City for compensation?
Yes, in principle, and several are already preparing. BBC Sport reports that a number of Premier League clubs had begun seeking legal advice on compensation even before the verdict emerged. One former senior club executive told the BBC that clubs would submit individual claims; another leading lawyer suggested the process could be centralised by the league. The Guardian reports that clubs, including some that were relegated, have been assessing losses from the period in question, and describes a wave of lawsuits as likely if the verdict is upheld.
The route exists inside the rulebook. Rule W.55.5 lets a commission order a club to pay compensation "unlimited in amount" to any person or club, and Rule W.57 deals with how affected clubs make submissions on compensation, including at a separate hearing after the complaint is decided. The key precedent is recent. In June 2026 a Premier League commission ordered Everton to pay Burnley £35m, made up of £26m in damages and £9m in interest, after finding that "on the balance of probabilities, Everton's breach of the PSR caused Burnley to be relegated" in 2021/22, as BBC Sport reported. Everton said the ruling was "fundamentally flawed in both law and fact" and have appealed.
City's case would be far harder to model. The Everton claim turned on one season and a few points; claims against City could span nine seasons, titles, European qualification and relegation. BBC Sport notes that clubs whose league positions were affected could argue a loss of chance to win honours, and that each claim would need to be heard individually by an independent commission. One lawyer told the BBC: "The question isn't whether the clubs can take legal action... it's where does the line of people who have a case actually end?" For claimant clubs weighing costs, the funding market matters, from how litigation funding works in the UK after PACCAR to the lessons of the Merricks funder award. Clubs considering claims will want UK-based advisers with experience of expert economic evidence on lost revenue.
The associated party transaction rules and City's earlier challenge
The 115 charges case is separate from City's challenge to the Premier League's associated party transaction (APT) rules, which govern commercial deals between clubs and companies linked to their owners. According to BBC Sport, an independent arbitration panel found against aspects of the APT rules in 2024 after City brought a challenge, and a tribunal in February 2025 found the rules governing sponsorship deals from 2021 to 2024 "void and unenforceable". City and the Premier League then settled in September 2025, with the club accepting that the APT rules are valid and binding and both sides terminating the proceedings.
The rules exist, the BBC explains, to stop clubs benefiting from owner-linked deals priced above "fair market value". That theme links the two cases: the heart of the 115 charges is the allegation that sponsorship income from connected companies was inflated. For commercial partners, the combined message is that owner-linked and related-party sponsorship will be scrutinised closely. Our earlier analysis of crypto sponsorships and Premier League clubs shows how quickly sponsorship can become a regulatory issue, and deal teams will often need competition and antitrust advisers alongside sports lawyers.
Where the Independent Football Regulator comes in
The Independent Football Regulator, an executive non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, is not a party to the Premier League's disciplinary case. But its powers over the people who own and run clubs may make the outcome relevant to it. Part 4 of the Football Governance Act 2025 requires the regulator to decide whether owners and officers of regulated clubs are suitable, and allows it to assess incumbent owners where it has grounds for concern.
Section 37 sets out what it must consider. In assessing an individual's honesty and integrity, the regulator must have regard to, among other things, "any action of a regulatory or disciplinary nature that is being or has been taken in relation to the individual", and to whether the individual is or has been a party to non-criminal proceedings in any court or tribunal. It must also have regard to any relevant determination made by a competition organiser such as the Premier League. Section 37(6) prevents rules that would let the regulator decide a matter based solely on an individual's connection with the government of any country.
Whether any of that is engaged here is an open question, and it applies to individuals rather than the club. Football finance expert Stefan Borson told BBC Radio 5 Live that the regulator "could be interested in some of the findings", pointing to the owners and directors test. That is commentary, not a statement of the regulator's intentions, but it is a reason for boards and investors to take regulatory and public law advice once the written reasons are published.
What happens next: the timeline
The next steps follow a predictable order, even if the dates do not. The table below combines the confirmed history with the procedural steps that remain under the Premier League Rules.
| Date or stage | Event |
|---|---|
| November 2018 | Der Spiegel publishes the leaked documents |
| July 2020 | CAS overturns UEFA's two-year ban and cuts the fine to €10m |
| 6 February 2023 | Premier League refers the alleged breaches to an independent commission |
| 16 September to 6 December 2024 | Hearing before the three-person commission in London |
| September 2025 | City and the Premier League settle the APT dispute |
| June 2026 | Everton ordered to pay Burnley £35m; Everton appeal |
| 25 September 2026 | Guilty finding on most charges reported; no official announcement |
| 26 September 2026 | Chairman's open letter to supporters |
| Next | Sanctions hearing on mitigating and aggravating factors (W.54, W.55) |
| Within 14 days of a decision | Appeal to a three-member Appeal Board (W.71) |
| After the appeal | Possible Section X arbitration on narrow grounds (X.4) |
| Separately | Compensation claims by other clubs (W.55.5, W.57) |
In the meantime, the season goes on. City play Liverpool at Anfield on 11 October, BBC Sport notes, and BBC Sport also reports that a number of City players are understood not to have relegation release clauses in their contracts. Those contractual points, and similar clauses in sponsorship, broadcasting-linked and financing agreements, are where the uncertainty will be felt first.
When to take professional advice
Anyone with a contractual or financial link to the case should review their position now rather than wait for the sanction. That includes sponsors and commercial partners checking termination and morality clauses, lenders and investors reviewing covenants tied to league status, player agents and intermediaries, and rival clubs assessing whether they have a claim and how to preserve evidence of loss. Specialist sports and entertainment lawyers will be central, often working with forensic investigations specialists and advisory and accounting firms on quantum. For matters governed by English law and seated in London, the Corporate INTL directory of advisers in England is a starting point.
The honest answer to "when will Man City be punished for 115 charges" is that nobody outside the process yet knows. What is known is the sequence: a sanctions hearing, a 14-day window to appeal, a review by an Appeal Board, and a narrow arbitration route beyond it, with compensation claims running alongside. Until the written reasons are published, the finding should be treated as reported, not final.
Frequently asked questions
When will Man City be punished for 115 charges?
No date has been set. The commission must first hold a separate sanctions hearing at which both sides can put mitigating and aggravating factors, and BBC Sport reports that could take months. Any sanction may then be challenged on appeal within 14 days, so final punishment could be some way off.
Have Man City been found guilty?
According to the Athletic and BBC Sport, yes: the independent commission has found City guilty of the vast majority of the charges, with 114 of 115 counts upheld per the Athletic. The Premier League has not announced the decision or published reasons, and City say the process is ongoing.
What happens if Man City are found guilty?
Under Rule W.55 the commission can reprimand the club, impose an unlimited fine, deduct points, suspend it from playing League matches, recommend expulsion from the league, order compensation to other clubs and award costs. It can combine these or impose any other penalty it thinks fit.
Is Manchester City going to get relegated?
No decision has been made. BBC Sport reports that being found guilty on the most serious charges means City could face a points deduction serious enough to relegate them, or expulsion from the Premier League, but equally the commission could impose a fine or a smaller deduction. There is no fixed tariff.
Can Man City be stripped of Premier League titles?
The rules do not expressly list it, but the commission may impose any penalty "as it shall think fit", so it cannot be ruled out. BBC Sport has been told there is little appetite within the Premier League for stripping titles, and a points deduction, large fine or expulsion are considered more likely.
How long do Man City have to appeal?
Under Rule W.71 of the Premier League Rules, an appeal must be received by the Chair of the Judicial Panel within 14 days of the decision being appealed, with time of the essence. The Appeal Board can shorten that period where there is a compelling reason.
Can Man City appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport?
No. BBC Sport and Sky Sports report that City cannot take this case to CAS. After the Appeal Board, the only route is arbitration under Section X of the Premier League Rules, seated in England and Wales, and only on narrow grounds such as lack of jurisdiction, bad faith or serious procedural unfairness.
Can other clubs claim compensation from Man City?
Potentially. Rule W.55.5 allows unlimited compensation orders, and in June 2026 Everton were ordered to pay Burnley £35m for relegation losses caused by a PSR breach. BBC Sport reports that several Premier League clubs are already taking legal advice, and each claim would need to be heard by an independent commission.
Does the Independent Football Regulator have a role?
Not in the disciplinary case itself. But under the Football Governance Act 2025 the regulator assesses whether club owners and officers are suitable, and must consider regulatory or disciplinary action and relevant decisions of competition organisers such as the Premier League when judging an individual's honesty and integrity.
Sources
- BBC Sport: Premier League clubs seek legal advice over possible compensation (25 September 2026)
- BBC Sport: What punishment could Man City face after Premier League charges verdict and will they appeal?
- BBC Sport: Manchester City charges: could club be stripped of eight trophies?
- BBC Sport live: reaction to Manchester City's financial charges case (25 September 2026)
- BBC Sport: Rodri believes club are innocent of any financial wrongdoing
- The Guardian: Manchester City verdict: what happens next, will club appeal and could they be relegated? (26 September 2026)
- Sky Sports: Man City Premier League charges explained
- The National: Manchester City chairman responds to media reports on commission decision (26 September 2026)
- Premier League statement (6 February 2023)
- Premier League Handbook, Season 2025/26 (Sections W and X)
- BBC Sport: Everton ordered to pay Burnley £35m for PSR breach (June 2026)
- BBC Sport: Manchester City overturn two-year ban from European competition on appeal to Cas (July 2020)
- Football Governance Act 2025
- Football Governance Act 2025, section 37
- GOV.UK: Independent Football Regulator
About this article
This analysis was researched and written by The Corporate INTL Newsroom, which covers cross-border legal, regulatory and business developments for lawyers, professional advisers and financiers in over 150 jurisdictions. It has been checked against the Premier League Rules, the Premier League's 2023 statement, the Football Governance Act 2025, the statements of Manchester City and primary reporting. The independent commission's decision and written reasons had not been published at the time of writing, and the reported findings are attributed to the outlets that reported them. This article is general information, not legal advice; for advice on a specific matter, consult a qualified adviser. Last reviewed 27 September 2026. For more analysis like this, visit the Corporate INTL newsroom or subscribe to Corporate INTL.
