News Sports Trending

European Super League: Fans and clubs can be convinced to back new plans, says organiser

By 163 0

The head of A22, the organization behind the revived European Super League (ESL), believes that fans and clubs can be persuaded to support the new proposal. In 2021, the original ESL, involving 12 teams, faced strong opposition and collapsed within 72 hours. However, the European Court of Justice recently ruled against banning clubs from joining such leagues, leading to the announcement of a revamped ESL.

Uefa president Aleksander Ceferin dismissed the new proposals, stating that football is not for sale and jokingly looking forward to a two-team tournament. Five of the six Premier League teams that initially supported the breakaway plans in 2021 expressed commitment to Uefa competitions.

A22’s new proposal suggests a league system with 64 men’s clubs and 32 women’s clubs, featuring an annual promotion and relegation system with no permanent members. A22 CEO Bernd Reichart stated that the proposal addresses the concerns raised by critics of the original ESL, focusing on an open, accessible, and meritocratic league system alongside domestic leagues.

Reichart refrained from naming interested clubs but emphasized the importance of convincing both clubs and fans. The proposal aims to prioritize players’ health by aligning with the current football calendar, without increasing the number of matchdays.

Domestic leagues, including the Premier League, swiftly condemned the new project, reiterating their rejection of any breakaway concept. Despite the ECJ ruling, Uefa sees it as an opportunity to improve regulations, and Ceferin highlighted the need to maintain the connection between domestic and European football.

Champions League holders Manchester City and other previously involved Premier League clubs affirmed their commitment to Uefa competitions. The ESL saga, which began in 2021, faced criticism and opposition, leading to the withdrawal of several clubs. Ceferin mocked the new proposal, expressing skepticism about its closed nature and comparing it to the rejected 2021 version.

Picture Courtesy: Google/images are subject to copyright

News Trending

Apple should pay €13bn Irish tax, argues EU lawyer

By 170 0

A legal adviser to the European Court of Justice has recommended a reassessment of the ruling that permitted Apple to evade €13 billion in back taxes. The original decision, overturned three years ago, alleged that the Irish government had provided Apple with illegal tax breaks. Advocate General Giovanni Pitruzzella contends that the previous ruling overlooked crucial legal errors and failed to adequately assess methodological mistakes that, according to the European Commission, tainted the tax rulings in Apple’s favor. Although this legal opinion is not binding, the court typically leans towards such recommendations in the majority of cases.

Apple responded to the recent development, with a spokesperson emphasizing that the initial ruling explicitly stated that the company received no selective advantage or state aid. The tech giant believes this position should be upheld. In 2016, the European Commission determined that Apple had received preferential treatment from the Irish government, resulting in a significantly lower tax rate compared to other companies. The Commission argued that this amounted to illegal aid granted to Apple by the Irish state and symbolized its efforts to combat what it perceived as significant tax avoidance by multinational corporations.

The Irish government has consistently argued against the repayment of back taxes by Apple, asserting that the country’s loss was justified in making itself an appealing destination for large companies. Ireland, with one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the EU, serves as Apple’s regional base for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. While corporate tax rates fall under national jurisdiction, the EU wields substantial power in regulating state aid. In this case, the EU contended that Ireland, by applying very low tax rates to Apple, was providing an unfair subsidy.

Two years ago, the General Court, responsible for the initial ruling’s overturning, deemed the European Commission’s decision legally flawed. However, the recent recommendation from the advocate general suggests that this ruling itself may now face reconsideration, potentially reviving the debate over Apple’s back taxes.

Picture Courtesy: Google/images are subject to copyright

News Trending

Legal Challenge by Expelled Migrants in Europe Against EU’s Frontex Ends in Defeat

By 172 0

The European Union’s highest court has rejected a case against the European border agency Frontex, which was brought by a Syrian refugee family forcibly sent from Greece to Turkey in 2016. The family’s lawyers argued that Frontex should be held responsible for the deportation of refugees without the opportunity to apply for asylum, which is considered illegal under international law.

However, the European Court of Justice dismissed their challenge, stating that Frontex lacks the authority to assess the merits of return decisions or asylum applications, and therefore cannot be held liable for any harm caused.

The Syrian family, consisting of a husband, wife, and four young children, arrived in Greece in 2016 as part of the European migrant crisis. They registered their intention to seek international protection on the Greek island of Leros but were subsequently transported to the island of Kos. After just eleven days in Greece, the family alleges that they were flown to Turkey by Frontex and Greek authorities without being given the opportunity to apply for asylum or receiving an expulsion decision. The family claimed that they were misled into believing they were being taken to Athens when they boarded the plane. During the flight, the parents were reportedly separated from their children, who were between one and six years old at the time, and they were not allowed to communicate with anyone during the journey.

The family was released in Turkey but lacked access to housing, water, or sanitation. They later fled to northern Iraq. In 2021, they brought their case to the European Court of Justice, supported by human rights lawyers and the Dutch Council for Refugees.

Following the court’s ruling, the family expressed their disappointment, emphasizing that Frontex should be held accountable for their unjust treatment. Their lawyers indicated that they intended to appeal the decision.

Legal experts argued that individuals should not be deported to another country without a proper assessment of their need for asylum, which they claim did not occur in this case.

The Dutch Council for Refugees and the law firm representing the family stated that the ruling raised questions about how Frontex should ensure respect for fundamental rights in its activities, as mandated by its role.

Frontex responded by requiring EU member states to confirm that individuals were given the opportunity to seek international protection and that their applications were processed in accordance with EU laws.

The European Parliament had previously noted that human rights organizations, media, and civil society groups regularly reported cases of pushbacks or collective expulsions at the EU’s borders, often involving excessive force by EU member state authorities. Frontex had faced accusations of failing to protect individuals in these situations.

Picture Courtesy: Google/images are subject to copyright