Burnley’s award against Everton gives underwriters a roadmap, but tying a rule breach to lost results and revenue remains the hard part
Rival clubs and players considering compensation claims against Manchester City may have to wait until the club’s appeal is resolved to secure after-the-event (ATE) insurance, according to a specialist litigation insurance underwriter.
The Premier League announced on September 29 that an independent commission had found City in breach of more than 100 of its rules. City lodged an appeal on October 1 and denies wrongdoing. Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham reportedly lodged notices in 2024 reserving the right to claim compensation, while players and agents are said to be exploring loss-of-earnings claims if the verdict stands.
Rocco Pirozzolo, managing director and underwriting director at Harbour Underwriting, said: “With a live appeal, this creates uncertainty, and so I expect underwriters would want to wait for the outcome of the appeal.”
A three-member appeal board will hear the case and can dismiss or allow the appeal, send it back to the commission, or alter any sanction or compensation order. Sanctions will be considered at a separate hearing.
Under Premier League rules, the appeal hearing should be held within 12 weeks of being lodged, with a decision due within 30 days of it ending, which points to late January if the timetable holds. Sky Sports has reported the process could run later if City argue that the new appeal rules should not apply to their case.
A breach is only the first hurdle
Pirozzolo said the novelty of these claims may put them outside the appetite of some ATE insurers. For those willing to consider them, a finding that the rules were broken is only where the analysis begins.
“They know that the claimant has to connect that breach to a different sporting outcome and then translate that outcome into a financial loss,” he said.
That is the chain Burnley had to prove against Everton. In June, a Premier League commission ordered Everton to pay Burnley more than £35m in compensation and interest, finding that Everton’s breach of the Profitability and Sustainability Rules in 2021-22 gave it a sporting advantage that caused Burnley’s relegation. Burnley had sought around £51.7m, and the commission awarded £26m, with interest taking the total past £35m. Everton is appealing the decision.
For Pirozzolo, the award gives underwriters a roadmap for assessing such claims. The expert evidence Burnley relied on addressed both causation and the size of the loss, although Everton’s appeal leaves that roadmap under challenge.
Capacity and the cost of pursuing claims
These cases rely heavily on expert evidence, and Pirozzolo expects football clubs to “vigorously defend” them. They may therefore require significant limits of indemnity, although he believes the market has the capacity to provide them.
Third-party funding and dispute insurance are not only for claimants who could not otherwise afford to litigate. Premier League clubs and players with the means to bring claims can use them too.
Pirozzolo said “lawyers advising their clients in respect of these cases should consider both funding and insurance as ways to enable these cases to be brought.”
For brokers placing ATE, the timing of the appeals and the strength of each claimant’s causation evidence are likely to shape when cover becomes available and on what terms. Until claimants can show how a rule breach changed a sporting outcome and what that cost them, underwriters will have little to price.
