The email dropped shortly before 9.30am. It was June 30, 2021, and our barrister had just finished a swim when he checked his phone — and then his watch. Judgment day, in The Mail On Sunday's pursuit of open justice, was slated for 10.30.
Cue a dash across London, towards the Strand, where we arrived outside Court 73 of the Royal Courts of Justice. It had been three months since our reporter, Nick Harris, discovered a twist in the Premier League's investigation into Manchester City. It had been nearly three years since those proceedings began. And now we knew the two sides were united in their desire to keep any more details secret.
But in March a judge, who had ruled against City in a private arbitration, decided the public ought to know her findings. The club battled to reverse that call; this newspaper fought to hear their case.
After a series of letters met only dead-ends, we got wind of this latest hearing —with barely a day's notice. Off went an 11th-hour application, arguing that a journalist should be able to sit in court because another clandestine hearing would be 'inimical to open justice'.
The following morning, the Master of the Rolls said the court would hear our case. Across from our barrister — and solicitors on a watching brief from the Premier League — however, was a wall of sky blue silk fronted by Lord David Pannick KC, the finest advocate of his generation. 'Both David and Goliath,' as one figure in the legal sector put it.
Most barristers never reach the Supreme Court or the House of Lords. Pannick has appeared there 122 times, more than anyone else. 'He knows more about the law than many judges, he's more senior than many judges,' a source says. Over the past three decades he has acted in many of this country's most high-profile cases. Only recently, Pannick has acted both against the Government, and for Boris Johnson.
He speaks carefully, with clarity and courtesy. He steers clear of rabbit holes and red herrings. His methods have become famed for their simple brilliance.
No wonder City want him to lead their charge against the 115 charges brought this week by the Premier League.
'Of course you would want him,' an expert says. 'He is literally the best.'
Even if he won't come cheap. Reports suggest Pannick's fees put him on a par with some of City's highest earners.
'There is absolutely no reason why he should be paid less than Kevin De Bruyne,' one source says. 'He's going to be on his feet every day in court; De Bruyne plays for 90 minutes.'
In Court 73, however, Pannick lost twice. First against The Mail On Sunday, who won the right to have the sole journalist in the gallery. Then City's appeal failed, too.
Pannick was given a hard time by the court's back three: Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, Sir Julian Flaux, the chancellor of the High Court, and Lord Justice Males, an arbitration expert.
Lining up for the Premier League's attack? One of his own. Among those hired by City's opponents is supposedly Pannick's team-mate at Blackstone Chambers.
It promises to be a mighty war. But Pannick and City have already seen plenty of battles together.
Some have been in secret. Some have been significant, too. The Mail on Sunday's victory that day has become a 'useful precedent' for journalists trying to be the public's eyes and ears at private hearings. 'It arises not infrequently in all kinds of courts and tribunals,' a source revealed. Despite the efforts of David and Goliath.
