EMILIANO SALA: BLUEBIRDS RAISE NEW QUESTION

Just been reading an article from French sports press.

It states Cardiff City FC have forwarded another complaint to do with a cheque of around €17,000 that was paid for monies owed to Emiliano Sala from FC Nantes. However, Cardiff City are asking for an explanation as to how this cheque was paid to Sala's mother on the day the boy had the tragic accident?

Cardiff City are asking how this was paid to Emiliano's mother when the tragic incident didn't occur until later on that same day, so could not have been declared dead yet?

Cardiff City believe the cheque was given on that fateful day as a way of finishing any dealings with the player.


What are peoples thoughts around this new news?

Seems a strange thing to pay his mother monies owed to him, when so far as anyone was concerned he was still alive when the cheque was paid!

The above story is in L'Equipe news

I understand what you are saying, but does it imply any wrongdoing, by Nantes?

What are the legal implications?

seems to be grasping at straws all the time...

I understand what you are saying, but does it imply any wrongdoing, by Nantes?

What are the legal implications?

Im not a legal eagle,so couldnt rightly say.

Seems odd to put the money in his mothers name, and on the day of accident, and before it was known the player had been involved in an accident,let alone died in one?

I think the stance cardiff are taking, is nsntes did it like that to clear any responsibility left by them to the player.I guess its the fact it was done on the day of accident,anx not in Sala,'s name,but to his mother??

Personally I cant wait for the saga to end,either way!

I understand what you are saying, but does it imply any wrongdoing, by Nantes?

What are the legal implications?

Im not a legal eagle,so couldnt rightly say.

Seems odd to put the money in his mothers name, and on the day of accident, and before it was known the player had been involved in an accident,let alone died in one?

I think the stance cardiff are taking, is nsntes did it like that to clear any responsibility left by them to the player.I guess its the fact it was done on the day of accident,anx not in Sala,'s name,but to his mother??

Personally I cant wait for the saga to end,either way!

yep thats pretty much whats being claimed... could just have been a clerical error with the date on the cheque though { the article did not say when it was recieved just when it was dated } ? ..or ..they could claim ES had asked that the 16k be sent to his mother ...? as for it ending thinks its got quite a few miles in it yet...

Tell me if I am wrong but :-

At the time of the accident , he was to all intents and purposes a cardiff city player, subject to international clearance etc. But the contract was rejected wasnt it as it was not filled out correctly.

Now a contract is either in place or it isnt - it cant be 50%. So in a court of law the contract was incomplete. Hence, technically he was either still a Nantes player or he was a free agent. He certainly wasnt a signed up and a contracted Cardiff player.

What happens in this situation - Joe Ledley goes for talks with Bristol Rovers. He drives to Bristol with his agent. They agree terms and Joe signs a contract. Driving on the way back to Cardiff in his agents car - the Brynglas Tunnels collapse and that means Joe can no longer play again.

Later that day when Bristol Rovers and Cardiff look at the contract, Joe has not completed the contract correctly and subsequently the English FA / Welsh FA reject the contract. The contract stipulates that the contract must be ratified and agreed by the International Clearance procedures before the contract is complete .

Who is Joe contracted to Cardiff or Rovers at the time of the accident ?

Tell me if I am wrong but :-

At the time of the accident , he was to all intents and purposes a cardiff city player, subject to international clearance etc. But the contract was rejected wasnt it as it was not filled out correctly.

Now a contract is either in place or it isnt - it cant be 50%. So in a court of law the contract was incomplete. Hence, technically he was either still a Nantes player or he was a free agent. He certainly wasnt a signed up and a contracted Cardiff player.

What happens in this situation - Joe Ledley goes for talks with Bristol Rovers. He drives to Bristol with his agent. They agree terms and Joe signs a contract. Driving on the way back to Cardiff in his agents car - the Brynglas Tunnels collapse and that means Joe can no longer play again.

Later that day when Bristol Rovers and Cardiff look at the contract, Joe has not completed the contract correctly and subsequently the English FA / Welsh FA reject the contract. The contract stipulates that the contract must be ratified and agreed by the International Clearance procedures before the contract is complete .

Who is Joe contracted to Cardiff or Rovers at the time of the accident ?

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL } ...

I cringe everytime there is a report on Sala. The poor lad lost his life tragically and still 2 years after this the arguement as to who owes what and who's player he was rages on.

I really feel for his family having to read the back and forth shit, I don't know who owes what if he was our player or Nantes the fact is this has been handled horribly and should've been sorted by now.

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

I cringe everytime there is a report on Sala. The poor lad lost his life tragically and still 2 years after this the arguement as to who owes what and who's player he was rages on.

I really feel for his family having to read the back and forth shit, I don't know who owes what if he was our player or Nantes the fact is this has been handled horribly and should've been sorted by now.

The world is a tough place and unfortunately tragic events like Sala's death leave behind issues which have to be resolved.

My View in my opinion our Committee are clutching at straws, theyve already lost the case and are appealing, our legal costs have gone higher, this case if we lose will no longer cost us £15mill, but £20mill.

Personally I would of taken all the agents fees out £3mill worth, then tied to offer £10mill (not £12mill) FC Nantes over the three years as we were paying and I think we might have got some where.

My View in my opinion our Committee are clutching at straws, theyve already lost the case and are appealing, our legal costs have gone higher, this case if we lose will no longer cost us £15mill, but £20mill.

Personally I would of taken all the agents fees out £3mill worth, then tied to offer £10mill (not £12mill) FC Nantes over the three years as we were paying and I think we might have got some where.

From what I have read it is the agent fees which is the stumbling block to an agreement. They still want their full share when the decent thing to do would be to wave their fees.

There is also a problem in that there are 3 or 4 agents involved and their cut of the £15m is very high.

My View in my opinion our Committee are clutching at straws, theyve already lost the case and are appealing, our legal costs have gone higher, this case if we lose will no longer cost us £15mill, but £20mill.

Personally I would of taken all the agents fees out £3mill worth, then tied to offer £10mill (not £12mill) FC Nantes over the three years as we were paying and I think we might have got some where.

From what I have read it is the agent fees which is the stumbling block to an agreement. They still want their full share when the decent thing to do would be to wave their fees.

There is also a problem in that there are 3 or 4 agents involved and their cut of the £15m is very high.

Tony, I would of let them try and sue, there are 3 or 4 agents involved.

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

a fully completed transfer has zero to do with premier league registration...thats a cast iron fact and why FIFA have confirmed the transfer as complete as have our own FA..... its not for FIFA or individual FAs to delve into what uses a club might or might not have for a player.... and indeed many players { who had hoped to play in certain competitions but then did not } have signed for clubs and then not been registered to play in certain competitions. they do not then become free agents ...had he refused to alter his contract ? well we would be stuck with a player that could not play in the premier league { not picking up bonuses would obviously then be part of him making that decision and therefore his fault } ... players have even signed contracts with new clubs and missed the cut off during a transfer window by minutes... which means the transfer has not even taken place but are still contracted { but unable to play } for their new club until the next window as the contract between club and player is legally binding...
you cant just make your own rules and insert a bunch of provisos to transfers that simply do not exist that suit a certain situation .. a transfer is either complete or incomplete.. and the very last bit of any transfer is when both the home FA and FIFA have registered a player to his new club... which had been done , its the same rules for joe bloggs down the park paying subs to play as it is for Messi and money and contracts are not in the equation...

a transfer . a legal contract between an employer and employee and competition rules are 3 completely different things...

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

Re the contract situation that is what I thought. The contract has stipulations - without them being met - he technically is not a Cardiff player as the contract has not been fulfilled. Also re the contract - the monies involved would have have depended on criteria being met. which obviously could never be met after what happened.

I dont see how any court can uphold a contract that has not been met. I did the law of contract as a module on a uni course a long time ago and can still remember all the conditions that needed to be met etc.

Eitherway - if the contract is deemed valid, then the Cardiff legal team could technically go for breach of contract - as the contract was not fulfilled. They could claim possibly on life assurance policies if they were in place.

They could establish the exact value of the contract minus no appearance fees, no goals scores, no relegation etc etc etc. and then just pay the amount that was left.

You need to remember though these are all legal arguments - there are vast sums of money at stake. It should in no way impact the family of Sala. They need to be left alone to remember him.

It's all very complex especially as Annis says there are 4 or 5 agents involved -who will likely counter sue if they dont get their cut of the money. Best leave it to the contract lawyers. In a fair and just world, the agents should get nothing, Nantes get the value of Sala minus the significant add ons mentioned. The club sue who ever it was that booked the flight.

RE the person who said he was a registered Cardiff player - I think that is irrelevant to be honest with you - the only question to answer is - was the contract valid and in place at the time of death. I dont think it was - and that is what is being argued over. But IANAL (I am Not A Lawyer)

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

Re the contract situation that is what I thought. The contract has stipulations - without them being met - he technically is not a Cardiff player as the contract has not been fulfilled. Also re the contract - the monies involved would have have depended on criteria being met. which obviously could never be met after what happened.

I dont see how any court can uphold a contract that has not been met. I did the law of contract as a module on a uni course a long time ago and can still remember all the conditions that needed to be met etc.

Eitherway - if the contract is deemed valid, then the Cardiff legal team could technically go for breach of contract - as the contract was not fulfilled. They could claim possibly on life assurance policies if they were in place.

They could establish the exact value of the contract minus no appearance fees, no goals scores, no relegation etc etc etc. and then just pay the amount that was left.

You need to remember though these are all legal arguments - there are vast sums of money at stake. It should in no way impact the family of Sala. They need to be left alone to remember him.

It's all very complex especially as Annis says there are 4 or 5 agents involved -who will likely counter sue if they dont get their cut of the money. Best leave it to the contract lawyers. In a fair and just world, the agents should get nothing, Nantes get the value of Sala minus the significant add ons mentioned. The club sue who ever it was that booked the flight.

RE the person who said he was a registered Cardiff player - I think that is irrelevant to be honest with you - the only question to answer is - was the contract valid and in place at the time of death. I dont think it was - and that is what is being argued over. But IANAL (I am Not A Lawyer)

its irrelevant that he is a Cardiff City player ?
and id imagine the contract was in place.....because its the way his contract had been drawn up was why the premier league sent it back.

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

a fully completed transfer has zero to do with premier league registration...thats a cast iron fact and why FIFA have confirmed the transfer as complete as have our own FA..... its not for FIFA or individual FAs to delve into what uses a club might or might not have for a player.... and indeed many players { who had hoped to play in certain competitions but then did not } have signed for clubs and then not been registered to play in certain competitions. they do not then become free agents ...had he refused to alter his contract ? well we would be stuck with a player that could not play in the premier league { not picking up bonuses would obviously then be part of him making that decision and therefore his fault } ... players have even signed contracts with new clubs and missed the cut off during a transfer window by minutes... which means the transfer has not even taken place but are still contracted { but unable to play } for their new club until the next window as the contract between club and player is legally binding...
you cant just make your own rules and insert a bunch of provisos to transfers that simply do not exist that suit a certain situation .. a transfer is either complete or incomplete.. and the very last bit of any transfer is when both the home FA and FIFA have registered a player to his new club... which had been done , its the same rules for joe bloggs down the park paying subs to play as it is for Messi and money and contracts are not in the equation...

a transfer . a legal contract between an employer and employee and competition rules are 3 completely different things...

lets take Mendez as an example - he was a Cardiff city player, he breached his contract, contract terminated, do you think he would still get appearance fees, promotion bonus if we got promoted ? - yes or no ?

Sala may well have been a Cardiff player in the eyes of FIFA - that doesnt mean the contract was valid or complete - as Sala could no longer fulfill certain conditions in the contract. If the club found anything in that contract that was not fulfilled - then they will quite rightly claim it was invalid - which is what the clubs lawyers are doing.

So we can all be arm chair lawyers (me included) but obviously the people who are privy to the information think otherwise - and are exercising their legal right of challenge in the courts - any business would do the same - "it's business - nothing personal" as the old saying goes

Le equipe is a reknowned sporting paper it generally does not report fictitious or scurrilous stories? So all this nonsense on here is people trying to get own slant on a story that no one know sfa about when it comes to the true facts. As said before people happy for club to give nante 15m then be just as happy to blast them at later date if it turns out they were right to withhold the money..

Le equipe is a reknowned sporting paper it generally does not report fictitious or scurrilous stories? So all this nonsense on here is people trying to get own slant on a story that no one know sfa about when it comes to the true facts. As said before people happy for club to give nante 15m then be just as happy to blast them at later date if it turns out they were right to withhold the money..

nobody on this thread has questioned the accuracy of the article Allen...

id imagine the contract was in place.....because its the way his contract had been drawn up was why the premier league sent it back.

Last time I checked the phrase "imagine" is not one of the laws of contracts.
offer,
acceptance,
consideration,
intention to create legal relations,
legality and capacity,
certainty.

All the above need to be in place , if any one of them isnt - then it can be argued in court. There is a lot of wriggle room
The areas of discussion would be "Non est Factum" and "Law of Mistake" , there would also be lots of other areas they will challenge. Far too complex and boring to go into here, and way above my pay grade to offer a legal opinion.
The outcome will make for interesting case law though. Certainly beats having to memorise Donahue Vs Stephenson or Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co which were my 2

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

a fully completed transfer has zero to do with premier league registration...thats a cast iron fact and why FIFA have confirmed the transfer as complete as have our own FA..... its not for FIFA or individual FAs to delve into what uses a club might or might not have for a player.... and indeed many players { who had hoped to play in certain competitions but then did not } have signed for clubs and then not been registered to play in certain competitions. they do not then become free agents ...had he refused to alter his contract ? well we would be stuck with a player that could not play in the premier league { not picking up bonuses would obviously then be part of him making that decision and therefore his fault } ... players have even signed contracts with new clubs and missed the cut off during a transfer window by minutes... which means the transfer has not even taken place but are still contracted { but unable to play } for their new club until the next window as the contract between club and player is legally binding...
you cant just make your own rules and insert a bunch of provisos to transfers that simply do not exist that suit a certain situation .. a transfer is either complete or incomplete.. and the very last bit of any transfer is when both the home FA and FIFA have registered a player to his new club... which had been done , its the same rules for joe bloggs down the park paying subs to play as it is for Messi and money and contracts are not in the equation...

a transfer . a legal contract between an employer and employee and competition rules are 3 completely different things...

lets take Mendez as an example - he was a Cardiff city player, he breached his contract, contract terminated, do you think he would still get appearance fees, promotion bonus if we got promoted ? - yes or no ?

Sala may well have been a Cardiff player in the eyes of FIFA - that doesnt mean the contract was valid or complete - as Sala could no longer fulfill certain conditions in the contract. If the club found anything in that contract that was not fulfilled - then they will quite rightly claim it was invalid - which is what the clubs lawyers are doing.

So we can all be arm chair lawyers (me included) but obviously the people who are privy to the information think otherwise - and are exercising their legal right of challenge in the courts - any business would do the same - "it's business - nothing personal" as the old saying goes

do i think a player who was sacked ,has left and is now playing for another club gets appearances bonuses off us....
as for Sala... would this unable to fulfill contract happen if he had come back safe, fell breaking his ankle leaving the airport / entering his hotel ..and out for the season.... fell out with warnock / tan and therefore not picked { the later has happened } .. broke a leg in training the following morning.. etc etc etc........ infact ive read your opinion on injured players having contracts terminated... so i know youll think all the mentioned would also void a contract...

id imagine the contract was in place.....because its the way his contract had been drawn up was why the premier league sent it back.

Last time I checked the phrase "imagine" is not one of the laws of contracts.
offer,
acceptance,
consideration,
intention to create legal relations,
legality and capacity,
certainty.

All the above need to be in place , if any one of them isnt - then it can be argued in court. There is a lot of wriggle room
The areas of discussion would be "Non est Factum" and "Law of Mistake" , there would also be lots of other areas they will challenge. Far too complex and boring to go into here, and way above my pay grade to offer a legal opinion.
The outcome will make for interesting case law though. Certainly beats having to memorise Donahue Vs Stephenson or Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co which were my 2

lets try looking up the word SARCASTIC...... its bleeding obvious there was a contract.... because your whole arguement revolves around him not being able to fulfill the contract..and the Premier league not accepting his contract......jesus....
so yes id imagine { huge sarcasm } that the contract YOU are talking about existed....

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

a fully completed transfer has zero to do with premier league registration...thats a cast iron fact and why FIFA have confirmed the transfer as complete as have our own FA..... its not for FIFA or individual FAs to delve into what uses a club might or might not have for a player.... and indeed many players { who had hoped to play in certain competitions but then did not } have signed for clubs and then not been registered to play in certain competitions. they do not then become free agents ...had he refused to alter his contract ? well we would be stuck with a player that could not play in the premier league { not picking up bonuses would obviously then be part of him making that decision and therefore his fault } ... players have even signed contracts with new clubs and missed the cut off during a transfer window by minutes... which means the transfer has not even taken place but are still contracted { but unable to play } for their new club until the next window as the contract between club and player is legally binding...
you cant just make your own rules and insert a bunch of provisos to transfers that simply do not exist that suit a certain situation .. a transfer is either complete or incomplete.. and the very last bit of any transfer is when both the home FA and FIFA have registered a player to his new club... which had been done , its the same rules for joe bloggs down the park paying subs to play as it is for Messi and money and contracts are not in the equation...

a transfer . a legal contract between an employer and employee and competition rules are 3 completely different things...

lets take Mendez as an example - he was a Cardiff city player, he breached his contract, contract terminated, do you think he would still get appearance fees, promotion bonus if we got promoted ? - yes or no ?

Sala may well have been a Cardiff player in the eyes of FIFA - that doesnt mean the contract was valid or complete - as Sala could no longer fulfill certain conditions in the contract. If the club found anything in that contract that was not fulfilled - then they will quite rightly claim it was invalid - which is what the clubs lawyers are doing.

So we can all be arm chair lawyers (me included) but obviously the people who are privy to the information think otherwise - and are exercising their legal right of challenge in the courts - any business would do the same - "it's business - nothing personal" as the old saying goes

do i think a player who was sacked ,has left and is now playing for another club gets appearances bonuses off us....
as for Sala... would this unable to fulfill contract happen if he had come back safe, fell breaking his ankle leaving the airport / entering his hotel ..and out for the season.... fell out with warnock / tan and therefore not picked { the later has happened } .. broke a leg in training the following morning.. etc etc etc........ infact ive read your opinion on injured players having contracts terminated... so i know youll think all the mentioned would also void a contract...

Everything that is in a contract can be argued over and taken to court if either side feels the contract was not fulfilled.
That includes injuries (for which the club would have insurance cover) , it includes players taking drugs - breach of contract. As for the rest of the diatribe - see the previous points.

From your view point you seemed to think that both Mendez and Sala would have recourse to financial rewards as set out in their contracts (even though both contracts were no longer in existence). Mendez breached his contract - null and void , Sala (unfortunatley ) couldn't fulfill his contract. It is this sort of argument that will be used by both sides in the negotiations. And if they cant agree - then it will go to court - where previous case law will be taken into consideration. Though from memory I cant remember a case like this.

his PREMIER LEAGUE registration had been returned DUE TO HIS CONTRACT... not the contract itself .... and the Welsh FA had already confirmed his International clearance.. at the point of his death he was a registered Cardiff City player with the WFA and with FIFA who had a legal contract unable to play in a competition { the EPL }

Things are not always as simplistic as that. ES came to CCFC to play PL football. He didn't come to play reserve team football or Cup games which the contract he had signed would only allow him to do. His personal remuneration within that contract was clearly dependent on playing PL football (potential bonuses both due to both him and Nantes)

If that contract was then rejected by the PL and disallowed the player from playing PL football then clearly the contract was null and void (due to a fundamental breach) and a new contract needed to be agreed which allowed registration.

A fully completed transfer depends on several aspects all coming together and being completed i.e. registration, contract agreement and international clearance. Just because one or two of those aspects have been completed doesn't necessarily mean a transfer is complete. It would be reasonable to expect all of the above to have been completed including a playing contract and PL registration.

If Sala had lived then it is quite likely he would have signed a new contract and PL registration would have been granted. Unfortunately he didn't get the chance to do that and that is why there are reasonable doubts about the completion of the transfer.

I have always personally thought the transfer was in a state of flux and the fair thing to do is for CCFC and Nantes to bear the loss on a 50/50 basis.

a fully completed transfer has zero to do with premier league registration...thats a cast iron fact and why FIFA have confirmed the transfer as complete as have our own FA..... its not for FIFA or individual FAs to delve into what uses a club might or might not have for a player.... and indeed many players { who had hoped to play in certain competitions but then did not } have signed for clubs and then not been registered to play in certain competitions. they do not then become free agents ...had he refused to alter his contract ? well we would be stuck with a player that could not play in the premier league { not picking up bonuses would obviously then be part of him making that decision and therefore his fault } ... players have even signed contracts with new clubs and missed the cut off during a transfer window by minutes... which means the transfer has not even taken place but are still contracted { but unable to play } for their new club until the next window as the contract between club and player is legally binding...
you cant just make your own rules and insert a bunch of provisos to transfers that simply do not exist that suit a certain situation .. a transfer is either complete or incomplete.. and the very last bit of any transfer is when both the home FA and FIFA have registered a player to his new club... which had been done , its the same rules for joe bloggs down the park paying subs to play as it is for Messi and money and contracts are not in the equation...

a transfer . a legal contract between an employer and employee and competition rules are 3 completely different things...

lets take Mendez as an example - he was a Cardiff city player, he breached his contract, contract terminated, do you think he would still get appearance fees, promotion bonus if we got promoted ? - yes or no ?

Sala may well have been a Cardiff player in the eyes of FIFA - that doesnt mean the contract was valid or complete - as Sala could no longer fulfill certain conditions in the contract. If the club found anything in that contract that was not fulfilled - then they will quite rightly claim it was invalid - which is what the clubs lawyers are doing.

So we can all be arm chair lawyers (me included) but obviously the people who are privy to the information think otherwise - and are exercising their legal right of challenge in the courts - any business would do the same - "it's business - nothing personal" as the old saying goes

do i think a player who was sacked ,has left and is now playing for another club gets appearances bonuses off us....
as for Sala... would this unable to fulfill contract happen if he had come back safe, fell breaking his ankle leaving the airport / entering his hotel ..and out for the season.... fell out with warnock / tan and therefore not picked { the later has happened } .. broke a leg in training the following morning.. etc etc etc........ infact ive read your opinion on injured players having contracts terminated... so i know youll think all the mentioned would also void a contract...

Everything that is in a contract can be argued over and taken to court if either side feels the contract was not fulfilled.
That includes injuries (for which the club would have insurance cover) , it includes players taking drugs - breach of contract. As for the rest of the diatribe - see the previous points.

From your view point you seemed to think that both Mendez and Sala would have recourse to financial rewards as set out in their contracts (even though both contracts were no longer in existence). Mendez breached his contract - null and void , Sala (unfortunatley ) couldn't fulfill his contract. It is this sort of argument that will be used by both sides in the negotiations. And if they cant agree - then it will go to court - where previous case law will be taken into consideration. Though from memory I cant remember a case like this.

do i think a player who was sacked, has left and is now playing for another club gets appearance bonuses off us

the question was yours.... and ridiculous tbh ....hence the laughing emoji.... not sure if your on a wind up tbh..

Le equipe is a reknowned sporting paper it generally does not report fictitious or scurrilous stories? So all this nonsense on here is people trying to get own slant on a story that no one know sfa about when it comes to the true facts. As said before people happy for club to give nante 15m then be just as happy to blast them at later date if it turns out they were right to withhold the money..

Allan,

That’s the actual paper that contacted me direct and have kept me updated, the lady reporter told me a lot of private info

Le equipe is a reknowned sporting paper it generally does not report fictitious or scurrilous stories? So all this nonsense on here is people trying to get own slant on a story that no one know sfa about when it comes to the true facts. As said before people happy for club to give nante 15m then be just as happy to blast them at later date if it turns out they were right to withhold the money..

Allan,

That’s the actual paper that contacted me direct and have kept me updated, the lady reporter told me a lot of private info

well theyve come up with this cheque now...must be spending an absolute fortune on investigators and lawyers...

"do i think a player who was sacked, has left and is now playing for another club gets appearance bonuses off us
the question was yours.... and ridiculous tbh ....hence the laughing emoji.... not sure if your on a wind up tbh."

The point I am trying to get through to you is this :-
In contract law - if any party feels aggrieved then they have a legal right to take it to court. If one side feels the contract has been broken or was not in place - then the courts will decide it, based on the evidence provided etc.

So - for example - when is a players contract legally binding and when has it been broken or incomplete - is what I was trying to explain. The fact that it is in litigation would suggest that one side of the contract believe there are discrepancies (probably a lot more than one). And this is why it will go down as case law in the future re the laws of contract.
You need to remember that it is just basically a contract between 2 parties. Whether that contract can be completed after the subsequent events is what will be decided by a judge. And then if the contract is deemed to be in place then the value of the contract (minus all the amendments) will have to be decided.

From what I have seen and heard - there are plenty of discrepancies and subsequently when you take off all addons - then the contract value (if binding) will be significantly reduced. So 'inter alia' just for example the contract had a 2 million payment if City stayed up - then that would not be paid. If Sala had played 80% of all remaining matches then Nantes would get another million - well that didnt happen - so no more owed on that clause. If he had scored 10 or more goals Nantes would get another million - again - no money owed as the contract clause has not been met.

That is how contract disputes work - and when 2 sides disagree - it goes to court. From your view point you seem to think the club should just roll over and pay up - they wont and neither would any other business. I believe Capital Law are the ones representing the club, from what Ive heard they are usually very thorough in their case prep.