Reasoned decision in Manchester City's FFP appeal against UEFA has now been published by CAS. It runs to 93 pages.
tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user…
tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user…
Interesting that details of some sponsorship deals (Etisalat) are redacted, others (Etihad) are not. Also says Etihad paid City 221m GPB for 3 seasons through 2016. Per season that's more than Chevy's deal for Man Utd (but City's includes stadium, campus, etc)
As per the CAS rules, both sides picked a panelist each to sit on three-member group that would decide on City's appeal. City also recommended the chairman, a Portuguese jurist, which UEFA agreed with. City secured its appeal by majority verdict, so 2-1
City sent in a formidable team of 12 to defend its case; UEFA half of that, and not a single member of the CFCB that investigated or took the decision. 
Strange. UEFA’s rules (first screenshot) that CAS can only take into account evidence submitted to UEFA. And yet allowed City to make a new case with new evidence at the appeal hearing.
Uefa’s own expert accountant said it’s difficult to understand what happened without access to contemporaneous email traffic from City, something Uefa waived their right to just before the hearing.
Even CAS said the original request (denied by City) for the emails was a “reasonable” one. Hard to understand why Uefa didn’t pursue this.
The CAS panel point this out again and again
Ultimately, CAS panel found Uefa was in such a hurry to get this done before new season, that it decided against fighting for docs that may have backed up case. So, City played a smart game in slowing down the process and threatened a further delay if Uefa insisted on emails.
