Sheffield Wednesday legal battle explained: A timeline of the Owls' fight with the EFL over sale of Hillsborough

But what exactly has gone on and where are we up to? How have things played out so far? What are the likely punishments?

Take a stroll through our timeline of what’s happened so far.

July 2018 – Sheffield Wednesday fail to hand over 2017/18 accounts

Although not public knowledge at the time, Sheffield Wednesday failed to hand over their accounts for the 2017/18 year to the EFL on time.

They were not the only Championship club to fail to do so – Reading also submitted their accounts late.

June 18 2019 – Sheffield Wednesday are confirmed to be under soft transfer embargo

While the first rumblings of potential issues with the submission of Sheffield Wednesday accounts for the 2017/18 season had been building for weeks, it wasn’t until mid-June that it was confirmed they were operating under an EFL-enforced ‘soft transfer embargo’, restricting their financial powers in the transfer market.

Despite the embargo, Julian Borner, Moses Odubajo and Kadeem Harris were signed to the club on free transfers having already started pre-season training with the club.

July 11 – Sheffield Wednesday submit their accounts to the EFL

And herein lies the ongoing issue. EFL regulations stipulate a club can post a loss of no more than £39m over a three-year cycle and Wednesday’s didn’t, technically speaking, thanks to the sale of Hillsborough for £60m to a separate company set up and owned by a Mr Dejphon Chansiri.

The accounts showed a pre-tax profit of £2.6m in 2017/18, including the £60m sale of Hillsborough – £38m of which was accounted as profit.

Football finance experts commented that the stadium sale was peculiar in that no sale was registered with authorities and that no cash appeared to have swapped hands, but likened it to circumstances at Derby County and Aston Villa in recent years.

July 26 – Soft transfer embargo is lifted by the EFL

All seemed well when the soft transfer embargo imposed on Wednesday by the EFL was lifted a fortnight after their accounts were submitted.

It was made clear to The Star that there were still issues to be ‘ironed out’ between the two parties.

The club went on to sign Australian midfielder Massimo Luongo for a fee believed to be around £1m on transfer deadline day. He was the Owls’ only cash transfer of the window.

September 4 – EFL to investigate Sheffield Wednesday over sale of Hillsborough

Reports in the national media claimed the EFL had ordered independent stadium valuations of Wednesday, Derby County and Reading's grounds after alleged misconduct.

November 14 – Sheffield Wednesday charged with misconduct

Sheffield Wednesday were officially charged by the EFL over the sale of Hillsborough.

An EFL statement read: “Following a formal investigation into financial information provided by Sheffield Wednesday in relation to the Club’s 2017/18 Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) submission, the EFL has today issued a number of charges relating to alleged breaches of EFL Rules.”

Owner Dejphon Chansiri, finance director John Redgate and the Owls' former chief executive Katrien Meire – who has since left the club – were also understood to have been charged.

Likely punishments included the deduction of points from the club.

November 21 – Boss says Wednesday ‘very confident’ of successful outcome

Sheffield Wednesday manager Garry Monk, who previously battled off-field financial wranglings in his time at Birmingham City, spoke to the press about the issues for the first time.

Speaking ahead of their clash with 2-1 defeat at table-topping West Brom, Monk maintained his players would not be distracted by the speculation and that the club had told him they were ‘very confident’ the issue would be resolved.

December 4 – Owls come out fighting

In an explosive statement, Sheffield Wednesday fired back at misconduct charges brought against them by the EFL, claiming that the authority was in breach of ‘binding expectation’ and that they were ‘unlawful’.

They maintain that the Hillsborough deal had been ratified by the EFL and that they have evidence to prove the authority had guided in the sale.

A public club statement said that it ‘reserved all of its rights against the EFL and will take all such actions as are necessary to protect its rights and integrity, and those of its current and former officers, including in relation to inaccurate reporting.’

December 5 – EFL hit back

In another strongly-worded public statement, the EFL reaffirmed it position the following day, claiming they had ‘sufficient evidence to charge Sheffield Wednesday with misconduct over the sale of Hillsborough stadium.’

The statement claimed that new evidence had come to light, prompting their misconduct charge. It said: ‘following the review of a large number of documents provided by the club - some of those seen for the first time – evidence came to light to justify multiple charges of misconduct.’

December 18 – Owls to take further action against EFL

Sheffield Wednesday said that they will continue to fight an EFL charge of misconduct after they claimed the authority ‘refused to agree a sensible procedure’ over their claim they have evidence to prove they had permission to go ahead with the sale of Hillsborough.

A statement repeated the accusation that the EFL had acted unlawfully and said: “The Club will continue to take such steps as it considers necessary to protect and enforce its rights against the EFL and to protect it from unlawful action by the EFL affecting the Club and the performance of its team.”