Manchester City Football Club Ltd v The Football Association Premier League Ltd [2021] EWHC 628 (Comm) (17 March 2021)

Manchester City Football Club Ltd v The Football Association Premier League Ltd [2021] EWHC 628 (Comm) (17 March 2021)

The Premier League Rules, properly construed, permit the Premier League to institute arbitral proceedings under Section X for the Information Claim, and there is no express or implied term excluding such jurisdiction. The process for appointment and reappointment of arbitrators to the Panel does not give rise to a real possibility of bias or breach the requirements of impartiality under the Arbitration Act 1996.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 628 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Manchester City Football Club Limited; First Defendant: The Football Association Premier League Limited; Defendant (arbitrator): Philip Havers QC; Defendant (arbitrator): John Machell QC; Defendant (arbitrator): Daniel Alexander QC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitral Jurisdiction, Apparent Bias, Interpretation of Sports Regulations, Impartiality of Arbitrators
Arbitration Sports Law Contract Law Arbitral Jurisdiction Apparent Bias Interpretation of Sports Regulations Impartiality of Arbitrators

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manchester City Football Club Limited

Claimant

The Football Association Premier League Limited

First Defendant

Philip Havers QC

Defendant (arbitrator)

John Machell QC

Defendant (arbitrator)

Daniel Alexander QC

Defendant (arbitrator)

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal had substantive jurisdiction under Section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to hear the dispute under the Premier League Rules
  2. 2 Whether the arbitral proceedings were unfair or gave rise to apparent bias under Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 due to the process for appointment and reappointment of arbitrators

Ratio Decidendi

The Premier League Rules, properly construed, permit the Premier League to institute arbitral proceedings under Section X for the Information Claim, and there is no express or implied term excluding such jurisdiction. The process for appointment and reappointment of arbitrators to the Panel does not give rise to a real possibility of bias or breach the requirements of impartiality under the Arbitration Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to set aside the arbitral award under Section 67 and/or Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 is dismissed.
  • No order for removal of the arbitrators under Section 24 of the Arbitration Act 1996.