A leading sports lawyer has shed light on the likelihood of Manchester City winning the appeal after the FFP guilty verdict.

Last month, it was confirmed that Man City have been found guilty on 114 of their 115 charges after being accused of breaching the Premier League’s FFP rules between 2009 and 2018.

Despite this, Enzo Maresca‘s side continue to insist on their innocence and have appealed, though they face sanctions ranging from a fine to being stripped of their Premier League titles if the guilty verdict remains.

Man City face “substantial hurdles” with FFP appeal

A report on Friday afternoon revealed Man City’s five-part plan to ‘overturn’ the guilty FFP verdict, but leading sports lawyer James Severn has now said that they face “substantial hurdles” for a successful appeal.

Regardless, he has said what Man City “will need” to do for a successful appeal.

“City will need to identify a material error of law, principle or fact, or serious procedural unfairness, which materially affected the Commission’s decision,” Severn told BBC Sport.

“The Appeal Board nevertheless has broad powers to allow or dismiss the appeal, vary the decision or make any other order it considers appropriate.”

Severn has also noted that the government documents that supposedly support Man City’s case may not be useful if they were already made available to the independent comission.

“The bank statements, government records and contemporaneous payment documents could be powerful evidence if they establish a clear audit trail showing the disputed funds came from the Abu Dhabi government rather than the owners,” Severn added.

“However, if that evidence was already before the Commission, which nevertheless concluded that the arrangements were a sham, City will face an uphill struggle to demonstrate the finding was materially wrong.”

Man City could have a case for a “material factual error” in the FFP appeal

Still, Severn has revealed a potential route to success for Man City in the appeal process.

He continued: “If City can demonstrate the Commission fundamentally misunderstood the emails, failed to consider their proper context or reached conclusions inconsistent with other contemporaneous documents, that could amount to a material factual error.

“City’s difficulty is that the Commission heard extensive witness and documentary evidence but nevertheless made serious findings of sham arrangements and disguised owner funding.”