gshc2020.com

It was confirmed on Tuesday that an independent commission found City guilty of all charges relating to breaches of the Premier League's financial regulations between the 2009-10 and 2017-18 seasons.

City have repeatedly denied guilt, and have signalled an intent to lodge an appeal by Friday.

The club were found to have artificially inflated revenue through "sham" sponsorship agreements with the help of their owners.

The independent commission which studied the case found City "utilised devices" to "disguise the true extent of certain club liabilities".

The Treasury Committee, which is responsible for overseeing policies and administration of HMRC, has therefore asked whether the government department has requested the redacted documents contained within the commission's report.

Dame Meg Hillier, chair of the Treasury Committee, said she would "welcome reassurance from HMRC that you are seized of the importance of these issues and the public interest in this case".

The letter follows a report from the Tax Policy Associates, external which claims City failed to pay as much as £12m in unpaid tax because of a "sham" contract with former manager Roberto Mancini.

In addition to unpaid income tax and National Insurance, the report claims City could face a penalty charge that would take their liabilities to £24m.

Manchester City will claim as part of their appeal that key sponsorship deals were funded by the Abu Dhabi government, rather than the club's owners.

Owners Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) - a private investment company belonging to United Arab Emirates vice-president and deputy prime minister Sheikh Mansour - are said to have topped up the value of commercial deals as part of a "disguised funding scheme" to the scale of £830.69m.

This, it was argued, enabled the club to appear to comply with Premier League and Uefa financial rules.

However, as first reported by the Daily Mail and Times, sources have told BBC Sport that City are expected to tell an appeal board that they have evidence showing the money directed to sponsors came from the Abu Dhabi government, rather than from ADUG.

Premier League rules allow state-owned bodies to sponsor clubs.

The independent commission detailed how City had "denied there had ever been any disguised funding scheme of the type alleged by the Premier League. Its case was that [it] had misunderstood how Abu Dhabi sponsorship agreements had been funded... The reality was [the club contested] that Abu Dhabi sponsors had always been liable for all recorded sponsorship fees and all had in fact been paid to the club by Abu Dhabi sponsors from their own funds/resources.

"No part of any recorded sponsorship fee had been paid by ADUG or from using ADUG funds. Abu Dhabi sponsors had from time to time applied for financial assistance from the Abu Dhabi government toward their liability to pay the recorded sponsorship fees - such applications had been granted…"

The independent commission rejected this submission as "untrue", saying: "We concluded that it was an 'explanation' that the club had concocted well after the event in an attempt to obscure and conceal the realities of the disguised funding scheme."

City's argument is likely to lead to renewed debate over the extent to which City's ownership is separate from the Abu Dhabi state, and over the ramifications of club ownership with state connections.

Mansour is a member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi, and the brother of UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

Since the takeover in 2008, City have insisted the club is a completely private enterprise, and not state-owned. However, some critics have questioned the distinction, with human rights campaigners claiming the ownership of City has been used to "sportswash" the UAE.

On Saturday, City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak referred to "irrefutable evidence" that he claimed supports the club's claims of innocence. City have claimed the commission's decision contained "clear material errors, of law, principle and fact, and is unsafe".

It has emerged that Al Mubarak, who was appointed chairman of City following the takeover in 2008, is named as an Emirati diplomat on the UK government's current directory of all foreign representatives.

Representatives of foreign states and their diplomatic staff "enjoy privileges and immunities under the Diplomatic Privileges Act (1964)", giving diplomats immunity from prosecution under criminal, civil and administrative laws.

City's principal sponsor Etihad Airways has said it is considering legal action against the Premier League, claiming the release of the commission findings had "damaging implications… despite the airline not being named in the redacted published findings".

The UAE's state-owned national airline said it "categorically rejects any finding, conclusion or implication that suggests the airline has ever been involved in improper commercial arrangements".

Etihad is owned by sovereign wealth fund L'Imad which is chaired by the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, the son of the UAE president.

The Premier League declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.

Additional reporting from James Landale, diplomatic correspondent for BBC News. %!s()

Several school principals were injured, harassed or assaulted during blockades at high schools on Thursday, according to reports from regional education authorities, prefectures and union representatives.

Recommended Stories

• list 1 of 2Public workers in France strike over pay as student protests turn violent
• list 2 of 2What’s behind French student protests that turned violent?

Police have already detained hundreds of protesters at the lycees, which students aged 15 to 18 attend for their final three years of secondary education in France.

At Marseille’s Victor Hugo high school, the teachers were inadvertently splashed as a student attempted to throw petrol into a rubbish bin, local authorities said. Earlier, the prosecutor’s office had ⁠said the teachers had been assaulted and “doused in petrol”.

At another school in the city, Saint-Exupery high school, hundreds of young people surrounded a firetruck that had arrived to put out a blaze in the morning, police said. The attackers forced the firefighters to flee the vehicle, then set it alight.

In Nantes, firefighters extinguished a fire at a high school entrance following what regional education officials called a gathering “marked by violence towards staff”. In Strasbourg, trams were halted to “restrict the movements of rioters and demonstrators”, and students burned barriers on tram tracks, authorities said.

“There are 35 of us per classroom. With 35 degrees Celsius [95 degrees Fahrenheit] in summer, it’s unbearable. There aren’t enough toilets, and there are water leaks in some rooms,” Raphael, a 17-year-old who withheld his surname for fear of reprisals, told the AFP news agency outside a protest in Strasbourg.

“The building is falling apart, the cafeteria is too small. There’s zero budget, zero resources, not enough supervisors.”

His frustration echoes a wave of student anger that has spread across France since last week, as high school pupils protest and grievances snowball into nationwide unrest.

Some 340 demonstrations were under way outside high schools by mid-morning on Thursday, with more than 160 schools shut down as a result, police said.

University students joined in, blocking access to about 30 campuses, including in Paris and Marseille, according to a student union.

Authorities have reported many dozens of injuries – some from thrown objects, others reportedly from police riot-control projectiles.

Interior Minister Laurent Nunez said police have opened internal investigations into brutality allegations involving three students.

Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu convened a crisis meeting and asked ministers to cancel upcoming official travel so authorities could focus on the demonstrations, his office said.

French Education Minister Edouard Geffray said that he would successively meet representative staff unions and parent and student associations on Friday.

The unrest has become entangled in the race to succeed President Emmanuel Macron next May. The government has accused the far-left France Unbowed party of encouraging the protests. Presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon said Wednesday that his party “called for nonviolent methods of struggle” and criticised the government’s response as repressive.

The artist now known as Ye has filed a new motion in Los Angeles seeking to dismiss the wrongful termination and harassment lawsuit brought by a staffer involved in Ye’s now-defunct and highly controversial K-12 private Christian school, Donda Academy. A trial is scheduled for January.

The staffer, Murphy Aficionado, sued Ye in November 2024, alleging that his job as a Yeezy project manager became a living “nightmare” after Ye purportedly hired him in late 2022 at $125 an hour. Aficionado claims he routinely worked 70-hour weeks and sometimes slept at the office to meet Ye’s demands, including work on a plan to move Donda Academy to a new “decrepit property” without the necessary permits. His lawsuit includes a text in which Ye allegedly wrote, “I need to pay you for your time.”

Aficionado alleges in his lawsuit that Ye subjected him to a daily barrage of bigoted and antisemitic remarks, yelled at him, and made disparaging comments about his Filipino tattoos. According to the complaint, Ye told him on one occasion, “The Jews are out to get me. They froze my bank account. The Jews got Kim and my kids,” referring to his now ex-wife, Kim Kardashian.

In his new motion for summary judgment, Ye is asking the court to resolve the case in his favor without a trial. He argues that Aficionado never worked for Yeezy and instead taught only a temporary, part-time engineering class at Donda Academy that ended when the school shut down. Ye says Aficionado was paid $52 an hour for the teaching job and that the school’s principal never heard him complain about his working conditions.

“There was never any employment relationship between Yeezy and plaintiff. Plaintiff did not submit an employment application, receive an offer letter, there is no record of his onboarding, he has no personnel file, he was never provided an employee email account, he had no work schedule, or supervisory assignment,” the new motion obtained by Rolling Stone argues.

Editor’s picks

According to the new filing, Aficionado’s claims should fail because, although his discovery responses identify Ye as his alleged harasser, they “describe no particular incident, identify no particular comment connecting the alleged conduct to a protected characteristic.”

“Plaintiff’s sensational allegations in the complaint read more like material for tabloid headlines than a case supported by evidence,” the new filing states. “When required under oath to identify the facts supporting his claims, plaintiff supplied rote conclusions and vague assertions. His responses identify no particular discriminatory comment or harassment incident, no dated sequence connecting a complaint to an adverse decision, and no compensation rate or formation date for the alleged contract.”

Attempts to reach Aficionado’s lawyers for comment were not immediately successful Thursday. Ye’s lawyers did not respond to a request for further comment. A hearing on the motion is set for Dec. 17.

Trending Stories

In his lawsuit, Aficionado described meetings at the Beverly Hills Waldorf Astoria that he said left him deeply disturbed. At one alleged meeting, in November 2022, Aficionado encountered Ye’s wife, Bianca Censori, topless in the suite and tried to leave, but Ye ordered him to stay, the lawsuit claims. Ye then referred to a lawyer who had just departed as “a Jewish spy,” and later left Aficionado waiting while he had loud sex with Censori in a nearby bedroom, the complaint alleges. Aficionado said Ye returned wearing a T-shirt bearing a swastika and asked, “Don’t you like my shirt?”

The lawsuit is not the first filed by a purported Yeezy project manager alleging mistreatment. At a trial last March, Tony Saxon was awarded $140,000 for injuries he suffered while working at Ye’s $57 million Malibu beach house. %!s()

“We have parted ways with three individuals for violating our policies on accessing and handling sensitive company information,” an OpenAI spokesperson said in a statement to the WSJ. “Our investigation confirmed that these individuals mishandled sensitive information outside established company procedures, violating our policies and breaking the trust essential to our work.”

The report did not name the researchers, the organization, or the information involved. OpenAI did not immediately respond to our request for comment.

Posts circulating on X named individuals some users believe were among those dismissed, who had also publicly expressed concerns about AI risk while at OpenAI. TechCrunch has not confirmed their identities.

In a statement to WSJ, an OpenAI spokesperson said an internal investigation confirmed the researchers had “mishandled sensitive information outside established company procedures.”

The departures come two days after The New York Times reported that OpenAI executives had brushed aside employees’ warnings about its safety practices, with employees describing a broader pattern of the company deprioritizing security. An OpenAI spokesperson told the Times the company takes security concerns seriously and has internal channels for reporting safety issues, while saying it recognized “a need to move faster.”

It’s unclear whether the three researchers raised concerns through internal channels before allegedly sharing information outside the organization.

The departures also come as OpenAI responds to a series of security incidents in which its AI agents escaped containment, posted user images, and hacked government websites. Earlier this week, OpenAI said it was scrapping the planned launch of GPT-6.1 Astra, an AI model, over safety concerns.

This isn’t the first time OpenAI has dismissed researchers over alleged information sharing. In 2024, the company fired researchers Leopold Aschenbrenner and Pavel Izmailov over alleged leaks, The Information reported.

Topics

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Aditya Mehta is a reporter at TechCrunch covering AI. He’s supported by the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism and attended UC Berkeley. You can contact from Aditya by emailing [email protected] or via encrypted message at adymehta.74 on Signal.

View Bio %!s()

Throughout this week, Russia has accused Nato of preparing to blockade its territory, which borders Lithuania and Poland, warning that it would even be prepared to use nuclear weapons if the West tried to cut off Kaliningrad from the rest of Russia.

Nato has sought to calm the situation, stressing it is a defensive alliance and urging Moscow to stop its "nuclear threats".

Western allies have faced a surge in so-called hybrid warfare incidents blamed on Russia, particularly in Poland and the Baltics in recent months.

Last week alone Poland said a Russian helicopter had strayed into its territory adjacent to Kaliningrad and Lithuania said its population felt "constantly threatened" by Russia, in part because of drones entering the nation's airspace.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Thursday that his country was preparing for further hybrid attacks, "including serious ones", after a drone armed with explosives was found in August on the tarmac at Leipzig airport close to Ukrainian cargo planes.

In a wide-ranging speech, the Russian leader told his audience he believed that international conflicts were highly likely to continue, but would get better as "Western hegemony" weakened.

Although Putin himself began the full-scale war in Ukraine in February 2022, he again blamed the West for provoking the invasion, arguing that it had simply been forced to defend itself and take up arms.

He also insisted that Russia's attacks on Ukrainian economic targets were a direct response to Ukraine's strikes on Russia's oil refineries, and on its ships in the Black Sea.

"Now from every direction we're receiving calls 'let's stop'. But they started it," he said.

Putin admitted Kyiv had "got some results" from its refinery attacks and Russia had lost about 1% of its GDP. Ukraine maintains it began attacking Russian oil infrastructure because it helped the Kremlin finance the war.

Russia has targeted Ukrainian energy infrastructure, ramping up attacks every winter since the war on Ukraine started in 2022. Other civilian infrastructure is also regularly hit, and a key bridge in Kyiv was attacked by drones on Thursday.

Putin also accused the West of instigating other conflicts.

"If it comes to a direct attack on the Russian Federation, in this case we are talking about Kaliningrad but possibly some other territories, of course the issue of use by the Russian Federation of all arms at the disposal of our country will inevitably and immediately be on the agenda," he said.

He accused Nato of holding naval manoeuvres in the Baltic Sea which he argued represented serious threats to Kaliningrad. If the territory came under Western blockade, he said Russia would be prepared to use all means and forces, including nuclear.

"We are not threatening anyone. We do not intend to attack anyone in 2029, in 2030, in 2050. But if we come across an aggression we will have to respond. Citizens of European countries should be fully aware of that."

He added that while he was aware of the nuclear capabilities of countries such as the UK and France, the weapons at its disposal were unparalleled.

Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte made clear on Wednesday that none of the alliance's "exercises or activities" posed any threat to Moscow and the Kremlin's messaging was "absolutely not called for and not helpful".

Putin spent some time talking about leading countries in the world having armaments at their disposal that could "swipe away all life or at least push the Earth to catastrophic consequences", and said unfortunately no-one could be sure they would never be used.

He drew the analogy of a gun sitting on a theatre stage - if it was hanging there at the start of the show, it would certainly fire at the end.

He appeared to call for the rules of warfare to be rewritten, and warned of the increasing risk of artificial intelligence.

"The automation and digitalisation of warfare leads to its gamification. This leads to degradation and sliding back of humanity to barbarity," he said. %!s()