The FA Premier League has responded angrily to claims that last week’s foreign satellite football case has added to the confusion surrounding the issue.
Yesterday the solicitor who defended licensee Karen Murphy said the judgment of Portsmouth Crown Court contradicted an earlier judgment in Bolton Crown Court on the legality of using foreign satellite systems.
However, the Premier League said “putting a spin” on the result was unhelpful to licensees who want to be clear about the law.
FAPL Spokesman Dan Johnson said: “We are extremely pleased with the definitive nature of the court's ruling and the clarity of the message it sends to all those involved in the licensed trade.
“His Honour Judge Pearson in Murphy ruled in our favour on all the points of law and warned publicans that they could not hide behind the shield of legal advice as a defence against the law.”
Johnson said the earlier case, MPS v Gannon, in Bolton Crown Court, had “turned on very specific facts”.
He said the Gannon case could not be considered the ‘landmark’ it is presented as by suppliers.
He added: "His Honour Judge Pearson in Murphy ruled that His Honour Judge Warnock's comments on the law in the Gannon case were wrong in any case.
“We consider the "landmark" authority has to be Murphy.”
Johnson added: ”We have commenced two actions against suppliers, and have other activity lined up, and whilst we do not want to keep on prosecuting publicans, those that continue to choose the advice of suppliers over that of the courts in respect of the illegal use of foreign satellite systems leave us with no option other than to take action, and protect our rights and those of legitimate publicans.”
Yesterday, Karen Murphy's solicitor Paul Dixon told the MA he wanted the High Court to consider the issue and give a definitive ruling on the legality of these systems.
The Premier League said no appeal had been lodged yet but that Karen Murphy still had two weeks to lodge one.
