Manchester United's pursuit of Carlos Tevez edged closer to the courts last night after the Premier League rejected an attempt by MSI, the offshore company that brought the player to the Premiership, to cancel his registration with West Ham United.

The Premier League also rejected a personal letter from Tevez in which he notified them that he was terminating his contract with the London club.

The Premier League refused to allow both Tevez' letter and MSI's request on the grounds that it does not consider that MSI have any rights over the player's registration, having been informed by West Ham that the club has torn up its agreements with MSI. Last Thursday the league ruled that Tevez could not join Manchester United unless West Ham received any transfer fee in full.

The moves by MSI to free up the player to join United came as it emerged that the Old Trafford hierarchy has ruled out paying West Ham anything for the player as they do not consider that the London club are his owners.

United's position, established after talks with MSI, who own Tevez' commercial rights, directly contradicts the Premier League's view. United are satisfied, however, that West Ham have no rights over Tevez and Old Trafford has been in negotiations with MSI's front man, Kia Joorabchian, over a two-year loan deal that would include a right to buy the player for a pre-arranged fee during that period. United also think that Tevez' registration will transfer to them as they believe that technically the Argentinian forward is a free agent.

United's stance threatens to undermine the agreement reached between the Premier League and West Ham in April after the club was found guilty of breaking rules governing third-party agreements.

On the morning after West Ham were fined €7.4 million for breaching regulation U18 the Premier League board informed West Ham that Tevez could continue playing for them if the offending contract, between West Ham and MSI, was unilaterally terminated by the club.

West Ham are bound by undertakings given in a letter to the Premier League following the ruling in which they said the contract with MSI had been terminated. Were the Premier League to allow any such deal, or for the transfer to take place without West Ham's approval, it would make a mockery of the assertion that the third-party agreement with MSI was terminated.

In order for the Premier League's ruling to hold water West Ham have to demonstrate that they own the player, exercising their rights by acting as the selling club.