By 90min | Created at 2024-11-22 10:30:43 | Updated at 2024-11-22 16:00:44
5 hours ago
Premier League clubs voted to approve changes to associated party transaction (APT) rules on Friday despite opposition from Manchester City.
An arbitration panel recently found some elements of the league's APT rules were unlawful, leaving both sides to claim victory from the verdict.
However, the Premier League gained the votes it needed in under 30 minutes on Friday morning, according to BBC Sport, to make changes to the guidelines, with 16 clubs voting for and four against. City were among the dissenting voices alongside Aston Villa, with both clubs writing to fellow top-flight teams in a bid to drum up support.
City have fallen off the pace in the Premier League title race / Crystal Pix/MB Media/GettyImages
A statement from the Premier League reads: "At a Premier League Shareholders' meeting today, clubs approved changes to the League's Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules. The Premier League has conducted a detailed consultation with clubs - informed by multiple opinions from expert, independent Leading Counsel - to draft rule changes that address amendments required to the system.
"This relates to integrating the assessment of Shareholder loans, the removal of some of the amendments made to APT rules earlier this year and changes to the process by which relevant information from the League's 'databank' is shared with a club's advisors.
"The purpose of the APT rules is to ensure clubs are not able to benefit from commercial deals or reductions in costs that are not at Fair Market Value (FMV) by virtue of relationships with Associated Parties. These rules were introduced to provide a robust mechanism to safeguard the financial stability, integrity and competitive balance of the League."
The Premier League asked clubs to vote on changes to make APT rules compatible with United Kingdom competition law, but City's general counsel Simon Cliff then wrote to the Football Association and the other 19 clubs, warning them against voting for amendments that "entail material legal risk".
