High Noon In The High Court

West Ham thought they had pulled off one of the biggest transfer coups in English football when they signed Carlos Tevez on Aug 31 last year, little realising that less than 12 months later the deal for the Argentina striker would end up being scrutinised by the High Court. Ben Hunt, writing in The Telegraph, charts the winding road that today sees Sheffield United asking for permission to appeal against the decision of an arbitration panel to dismiss their claims over the Carlos Tévez affair.

The Yorkshire club will need to prove to the High Court that the club should be given leave to appeal the decision of Sir Philip Otton's arbitration panel last week. Otton's judgment was that, although he would have deducted points from West Ham United for their failure to volunteer all details surrounding the third-party agreements that governed Carlos Tevez's career at Upton Park, he could not fault the Premier League's processes. That seemed to bring finality to the legal issues, since section S of the Premier League rulebook, which governs arbitration proceedings, demands that all parties submit to them on the understanding that judgments will be binding. But, say The Guardian, Sheffield United believe that Otton made an error in law by declining to order a new disciplinary commission to reconsider the punishment for West Ham's illegal conduct, prompting their court challenge today.

Sheffield United claim that the arbitration panel refused to analyse the seven reasons given by the Premier League commission for fining West Ham £5.5 million in April, rather than deducting points. The club feel some of those reasons were incorrect. In particular, they question why the commission felt justified to take into account the feelings of West Ham players and supporters and not the effect on fans from other clubs. The Premier League remains confident that the High Court will justify its handling of the affair. It maintains that the contract between West Ham and Kia Joorabchian, who owns the economic rights to Tévez, was terminated. Joorabchian disputes that. According to The Times, various legal experts have said that the chances of overturning the commission’s verdict are remote, but that they may have a better chance of success in claiming that the Premier League should not have allowed Tévez to play in the final three matches of the season. Sheffield United have asked Joorabchian to hand over paper-work relating to the transfer of the forward because it may help their case. West Ham claim that all documents are already with the Premier League.

"Don’t discount what might happen in the next few days," Kevin McCabe, the Sheffield United plc chairman, said. "This issue is not finished as far as we are concerned. It is ludicrous. Do you expect a company that owns the economic rights to Carlos Tévez and was willing to pay £15 million to get them from River Plate to walk away with nothing from his transfer to Manchester United? And do West Ham United expect them to get nothing? We’ve been digging up information that will be embarrassing for the Premier League to answer. Whether that means we have to take our place in the Championship, I don’t know."

It is hoped today's hearing should bring some clarity to a confused situation in which both West Ham and Tevez's handlers, Media Sports Investments, are asserting their exclusive rights over the player.