Football finance expert Stefan Borson has expressed “caution” over steps taken by Nottingham Forest to comply with UEFA rules. The Reds are just three games away from winning the Europa League and securing qualification for next term’s Champions League. If they do make it through to Europe’s elite competition, they could find themselves playing in the same tournament as fellow Evangelos Marinakis -owned side Olympiacos. Multi-club ownership (MCO) rules prohibit teams controlled by the same owners or directors from competing in the same European competition. An individual is not permitted to have a significant say in the running of two sides competing in the same UEFA tournament. With that in mind, just as they did last season, the Reds have taken steps to ensure they do not fall foul of the regulations. They include Marinakis diluting his control of the club and a blind trust being established. WORLD CUP LEGENDS: The stars who lit up football’s greatest tournament – Buy the Special Edition today To comply with the rules, clubs needed to take the necessary steps to ensure “as at 1 March 2026” MCO criteria had been met. A document appeared on Companies House showing cessation of Marinakis as “a person with significant control” of Forest on April 17, alongside documents listing new directors of the club as per the establishment of a blind trust. Forest are confident they met UEFA’s deadline, despite the timing of the documents appearing on Companies House. They say the new structure was in place before the end of February and the delay in confirmation was due to the new directors having to pass the Premier League ’s owners’ and directors’ test. Addressing Forest’s situation on talkSPORT, Borson said: “Nottingham Forest said they had it under control last season but we never knew whether they really did. They have said they have got it under control this season, but we don’t know because UEFA won’t confirm it. “I would also just express a little bit of caution. Crystal Palace had a lot of confidence last year that they were completely fine – they said it in multiple articles from April through to June – and they were not fine.” The Reds undertook similar arrangements last season when they were battling for a top-five Premier League finish which would have secured Champions League football. In the event, they finished seventh and had to settle for a spot in the Europa League. Forest’s place in Europe’s second tier competition, however, came at the expense of Crystal Palace. The Eagles were demoted to the Conference League after being found to have breached MCO rules. Amid a row between the two sides, Palace took their case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The ruling went against them and it led to the Reds taking their rivals’ place in the Europa League. Borson said: “They (Forest) say they are very confident they have addressed any potential Article 5 issues. Article 5 is within the UEFA rules around (multi-club) conflict. JOIN US ON FACEBOOK! Get all the Nottingham Forest latest via our Facebook page “They say moving Nottingham Forest into a blind trust now means they have fixed that problem. The issue is, if you recall last year, UEFA adopted a very strict deadline of March 1 and said if you have not carried out what you need to carry out to separate the organisation into non-conflicted entities it will not work for our rules. “Crystal Palace said: ‘There must be ways around it, there must be discretion. You must have used discretion in relation to, in particular, Nottingham Forest.’ “That was never established because Nottingham Forest didn’t qualify for the same competition as Olympiacos, so the actual issue Crystal Palace were pushing there was never formally tested by CAS. It was a moot point as to whether Crystal Palace were right that UEFA ever offered discretion as to the March 1 deadline. “The hard and fast rule, as we know from last year, is March 1 is key. That would mean, on the face of it, potentially Nottingham Forest have carried out the blind trust too late and the changes that have been adopted, because they come after March 1, will not work. “There is a proviso there, which is they may well have been in discussion with UEFA since before March 1 which means UEFA are happy with it. But UEFA won’t comment and won’t tell the world whether that’s the case or not, so we don’t know. “But Nottingham Forest are confident it has worked. We don’t know the position of UEFA, but last year it looked like March 1 was a hard and fast rule, so it is a bit of an open question. It will be a question every year for every one of these clubs in multi-club organisations; it’s a question for Everton and it’s a question for Chelsea.” Earlier this year, Jonny Owen, Simon Forster and Michael Dugher were removed from Forest’s board of directors. On Companies House, “termination of a director appointment” documents regarding the trio were filed. The latest documents show Janet Lucy Gibson, Mr Henry Peter Hickman and Eleanor Catherine Walsh have been “consented to act” as directors of the club. All three are listed as partners at Sinclair Gibson LLP law firm. Pundit Simon Jordan argued the blind trust set-up was a “charade”. However, Borson explained the rules concerning it are “stringent” He said: “It is certainly true that the law firm that is running it, in the city of London, is not going to be putting their hand in their pocket to fund any shortfalls in any financial situation at Nottingham Forest. That is definitely true. “I haven’t got the full list of things that are agreed as part of the blind trust in front of me, but there is an extensive list of rules that are put in place. It is not as much of a fabrication as you might think. “It is a real separation of the management of the club. But clearly, in preparation of going into a blind trust, you need to make sure you have got things planned such that the club can run independently through that year.”