| Updated:
Football’s new regulator may well shine a light into the dimmer corners of the beautiful game: its legal disputes.
For decades, the most high-stakes legal battles in English football have been resolved behind closed doors. Whether it’s the intricacies of Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR), Manchester City’s infamous 115 charges, or Associated Party Transactions, the theatre of choice has traditionally been private arbitration, governed by tight confidentiality rules.
The arrival of the Football Governance Act 2025 and the birth of the Independent Football Regulator (IFR) looks set to alter this culture of confidentiality. Clubs, individuals and organisations that are directly affected by decisions from the IFR will have the power to challenge these in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).
It was a relatively tucked-away point in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s Impact Assessment on the Football Governance Bill last July, but moving the final word on some football disputes to the CAT could usher in a new level of transparency.
Open and honest
Under the existing system, while the final outcomes of legal disputes can sometimes be published, the full cut-and-thrust of the evidence, the transcripts of the hearings, and the granular details of the arguments often remain shielded from public view.
The speculation over City’s challenges to the 115 charges are testament to the issues caused by this system: fans often fill the vacuum of information with their own hot takes.
The IFR changes the calculus. Its decisions are subject to the oversight of the CAT. Under the CAT’s rules, the starting point is clear: hearings are held in public.
Crucially, not all decisions from the IFR can be appealed to the CAT. Decisions deemed to have the highest impact on clubs, individuals and others – including the suspension of a license to operate, the suitability of a new owner or officer of a club, and both disqualification or removal or a club owner – can be directly appealed to the CAT.
Other “reviewable decisions” – the IFR’s catchy phrase to denote actions it takes that can be challenged or re-examined – will go through a judicial review process in the CAT to check that the IFR acted legally, rationally and fairly.
These decisions must first be internally reviewed by the IFR Board or an expert panel before a full-blown review by the CAT, and include financial penalties issued to clubs, decisions about moving a home ground or changing the club’s name, crest or shirt colours.
Regulator decisions
What’s more, an appeal to the CAT can be brought by any person with a “sufficient interest”, raising the prospect that players or even fan associations become involved in these cases.
A gripe that I often hear from London’s court reporters is that, while justice is open in theory, it is clunky in practice. Documents that should be accessible on the court’s infamous e-file often take weeks to become available, and delays are the enemy of newsworthiness.
The CAT is a more modern court than some of its compatriots, particularly the Royal Courts of Justice and its more 21st century cousin in the Rolls Building. Live streaming is routinely available for court hearings in the CAT, and its website and documents are easy to navigate by comparison.
For football’s institutional investors and club owners, this is a significant shift. Witness testimonies, financial disclosures and the cross-examination of executives could, for the first time, be accessible to the media and the public in real-time.
While “confidentiality rings” will no doubt still exist to protect sensitive information, the CAT’s default position of open justice means that some of football’s legal battles could be switched from private to public.
Feeling the pinch
These changes come at a time when legal spending from clubs, governing bodies and leagues is snowballing. Financial disclosures revealed that the Premier League’s legal spend topped £45m in the 2023-24 season, an eye-watering 600 per cent higher than its estimate before the season started.
Individual clubs are feeling the pinch too. From the multi-year battle over Associated Party Transactions (APT) to the points-deduction defences mounted by Everton and Nottingham Forest, legal fees are now a line item that can legitimately impact a club’s financial planning.
The IFR’s arrival adds a third layer of regulatory risk. Clubs must navigate the requirements of their domestic league, the scrutiny of Uefa’s financial regulations for those fortunate to compete in Europe, and now the IFR’s new rules. With the CAT acting as the new specialist court for appeals, the legal arms race is unlikely to slow down.
I wrote this time last year that 2024 was a record year for UK newspaper reports of football’s legal disputes, according to primary research conducted by Thorndon Partners. The increased potential for public scrutiny when clubs and individuals inevitably challenge the new regulator in the CAT might well see that record broken in years to come.
Charles McKeon is the co-founder of Thorndon Partners
