Friday, July 13, 2007

SHEFFIELD UNITED LOSE HIGH COURT APPEAL

Story Image


Failed: Sheffield United Chairman Kevin McCabe


SHEFFIELD United will now seek compensation rather than reinstatement to the Premier League after they failed in a High Court challenge over the Carlos Tevez affair.

A Commercial Court judge in London's High Court held today that there were no grounds for granting the Blades - backed by Fulham - permission to appeal against an arbitration panel’s ruling which saved West Ham from likely relegation.

Mr Justice Andrew Smith refused Sheffield Utd leave to take the case to the Court of Appeal.

After the day-long hearing, Sheffield Utd’s solicitor Paul Stothard, said the challenge had been brought on limited grounds under the Arbitration Act and had been refused on limited grounds.

“We have not been precluded from taking further action, whether against the Premier League or West Ham, and we will be considering the situation further,” he said.

West Ham’s involvement “in playing a player (Tevez) who had not been properly registered could still be the subject of further claims”.

Mr Stothard added that the outcome of today’s court hearing did not have any bearing on Tevez’s proposed transfer to Manchester United, planned for next week.

That was a matter between West Ham, United and the League, he said.

The judge had been asked to open the way for an appeal to the Commercial Court against the arbitrators’ ruling that West Ham should pay a £5.5 million fine, rather than having points deducted, following a finding that the club was responsible for “dishonesty and deceit”.

He said he could interfere with the decision only on narrow issues of law relating to the way the arbitrators conducted their inquiry.

There were no grounds for complaint, he said.

But he added: “This decision does not amount to a general endorsement of how this matter was dealt with. It is simply a decision that the statutory conditions on which the court should consider an appeal are not met.”

The judge did not deal with Sheffield Utd’s argument that the Premier League should not have allowed Argentine striker Tevez to play for West Ham for the final three matches of the season - including the last day winner against Manchester United which contributed to the Blades’ relegation.

This argument, although it would not affect West Ham’s Premiership status, could form the basis of a massive compensation claim against the Premier League by Sheffield Utd, who claim relegation will cost them £50 million.

The League’s decision not to stop Tevez playing for West Ham following breaches of transfer regulations came after the club said it had unilaterally terminated the third-party agreements with the striker’s representative, Kia Joorabchian.

Tevez went on to play a key role in the final three matches of the season, which saw West Ham escape relegation by a whisker.

Joorabchian claims Tevez is no longer under contract to West Ham and that he is a free agent and therefore able to sign for Manchester United.

West Ham insist that Tevez is still under contract to them until 2010 and that they hold his registration.

Fulham FC became a party in the case because it too was involved in the relegation battle until the penultimate weekend of the season.

Premier League chairman Richard Scudamore left today’s hearing without comment.

0 comments: