The independent commission that found City guilty of serious financial rule breaches concluded that some witnesses gave evidence they knew to be untrue, according to the full findings published this week.
The 40-page core decision provides considerably more detail on the evidence behind the verdict, including the commission’s assessment of witnesses who appeared during the lengthy hearing.
It adds another significant detail to Manchester City’s guilty verdict, which the club strongly reject and intend to appeal.
Commission makes serious finding over witness evidence
The case centred primarily on how Manchester City recorded sponsorship revenue and costs over a period stretching from 2009-10 to 2017-18.
The commission concluded that arrangements used to account for hundreds of millions of pounds in sponsorship revenue were shams and found that City’s accounts did not provide a true and fair view of the club’s financial position.
Its conclusions about some of the evidence presented during proceedings went further.
The commission found “that certain of those factual witnesses had given evidence at the hearing that they knew to be untrue and so had been dishonest”.
That conclusion formed part of the commission’s reasoning for rejecting City’s account of the disputed financial arrangements.
City fundamentally disagree with the findings and say they presented extensive evidence demonstrating that owner money was not secretly channelled into the club through Abu Dhabi sponsors.
Experts brought Abu Dhabi politics into City case
The proceedings extended beyond accountancy and football regulation. Both sides called experts to address Abu Dhabi’s political and governmental structures, according to The Independent’s detailed examination of the judgment.
The newspaper also spoke to Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, a fellow for the Middle East at Rice University’s Baker Institute, about the possible reaction in Abu Dhabi to the commission’s findings.
“The one thing that Gulf autocracies like Abu Dhabi won’t accept is embarrassment or shame,” he said.
Ulrichsen questioned how much political capital Abu Dhabi would be prepared to expend over City when it has other interests involving its relationship with the UK.
Those comments are the assessment of an external geopolitical expert rather than findings made by the commission. Their inclusion nevertheless illustrates the wider context surrounding a case involving a club owned by Abu Dhabi United Group.
Manchester City reject commission’s conclusions
City have responded forcefully to the judgment. The club say they possess “a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence” supporting their position and have confirmed that they will pursue the appeal routes available to them.
City said the commission’s opinion contained “clear material errors, of law, principle and fact” and described the findings as “unsafe”.
Chief executive Ferran Soriano subsequently addressed staff in an internal video and challenged the central allegation behind the case.
“The whole Premier League case against us is based on a single false accusation,” Soriano said, referring to the allegation that owner money was secretly introduced through sponsors.
He added that “every other false charge that has been thrown at us comes from that simple, central and completely false accusation”.
The strength of City’s response means publication of the commission’s findings has not brought the dispute to an end. The club intend to challenge both the conclusions reached and the way in which the evidence was assessed.
Supporters who followed our earlier analysis of the delays in the case will know the process has already lasted several years.
City now have until Friday, October 2 to lodge their appeal. The next stage will test the club’s argument that the commission made material errors in reaching its conclusions.
LIVE! Premier League 2026 / 27 News, Transfers, Updates & Viral Moments
