Emiliano Sala

[BTRFTG]

36 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

And even if it was, I imagine that Cardiff have been discussing it with their insurers to see if the insurer is on the hook for the fee.

You've conflated a number of distinct legal issues. The prime issue discussed here is whether Cardiff had entered into contract with Nantes for Sala's services. It seems pretty clear they had, hence owe Nantes. Whether Cardiff insured the player's contract, life or travel is a matter for them and I suspect such insurances differ. I understand Cardiff hold generic travel insurance for all their employees (not specific individuals) whilst on official business. Could be Sala's personal injury, life or contract cover wouldn't commence until UEFA had ratified the deal, but that would be Cardiff's risk and is partly of their own making in the way they attempted to misdirect agents fees.

I rather hope Cardiff are hoist by their own petard. That by arguing he wasn't their player (despite having contracted for him) insurers who decline 'agreed' cover on the basis the revised contract wasn't signed argue Cardiff had no intention of enacting the insurance and therefore no cover was in place.....

Edited November 6, 2019 by BTRFTG

[BRISTOL86]

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

You've conflated a number of distinct legal issues. The prime issue discussed here is whether Cardiff had entered into contract with Nantes for Sala's services. It seems pretty clear they had, hence owe Nantes. Whether Cardiff insured the player's contract, life or travel is a matter for them and I suspect such insurances differ. I understand Cardiff hold generic travel insurance for all their employees (not specific individuals) whilst on official business. Could be Sala's personal injury, life or contract cover wouldn't commence until UEFA had ratified the deal, but that would be Cardiff's risk and is partly of their own making in the way they attempted to misdirect agents fees.

I rather hope Cardiff are hoist by their own petard. That by arguing he wasn't their player (despite having contracted for him) insurers who decline 'agreed' cover on the basis the revised contract wasn't signed argue Cardiff had no intention of enacting the insurance and therefore no cover was in place.....

I’m not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of the situation, but suspect there’s an awful lot that those close to it - from both sides - know that we don’t....

Just seems a bit crass trying to score points on Cardiff about it when none of us know 1% of the situation. 

[BTRFTG]

7 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I’m not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of the situation, but suspect there’s an awful lot that those close to it - from both sides - know that we don’t....

Just seems a bit crass trying to score points on Cardiff about it when none of us know 1% of the situation. 

There was widespread reporting in the French press, from Sala's family and Cardiff were somewhat unguarded with their initial, posturing statements post his demise. Statements on which they've subsequently backtracked ( the great things Ng about social media and the internet is once it's out there it's out thete..... Cardiff went public as to why they thought they should not be liable though few, if any, appear to agree with their position.

[downendcity]

8 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

There was widespread reporting in the French press, from Sala's family and Cardiff were somewhat unguarded with their initial, posturing statements post his demise. Statements on which they've subsequently backtracked ( the great things Ng about social media and the internet is once it's out there it's out thete..... Cardiff went public as to why they thought they should not be liable though few, if any, appear to agree with their position.

Very soon after the crash Cardiff leaked to the press that Nantes had "demanded" the first instalment of the transfer fee, accusing the French club of being insensitive in view of the timing and making Nantes appear the aggressive bad boys from a financial standpoint. I think Im right in saying that it subsequently turned out that all Nantes had done was to issue a form of invoice in resect of the first instalment - a pretty standard procedure.

At the same time Cardiff mentioned that they just wanted their solicitor to check that "everything was in order". At that time my first thought was that they were looking for anything that would enable them to get out of paying for a player , whose untimely death meant he had no value to them. Subsequent events seem to confirm that initial suspicion.

I am sure that Cardiff have been acting on advice given by their lawyers and insurers, but sometimes, and this might be one of those occasions, it would be good if the owner had just said we need to do the right thing, even though it might not be the best thing financially.

 

 

[PHILINFRANCE]

16 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Very soon after the crash Cardiff leaked to the press that Nantes had "demanded" the first instalment of the transfer fee, accusing the French club of being insensitive in view of the timing and making Nantes appear the aggressive bad boys from a financial standpoint. I think Im right in saying that it subsequently turned out that all Nantes had done was to issue a form of invoice in resect of the first instalment - a pretty standard procedure.

At the same time Cardiff mentioned that they just wanted their solicitor to check that "everything was in order". At that time my first thought was that they were looking for anything that would enable them to get out of paying for a player , whose untimely death meant he had no value to them. Subsequent events seem to confirm that initial suspicion.

I am sure that Cardiff have been acting on advice given by their lawyers and insurers, but sometimes, and this might be one of those occasions, it would be good if the owner had just said we need to do the right thing, even though it might not be the best thing financially.

 

 

I mentioned way back in this thread that 'Demand' is simply the French word for ask and bears none of the aggressive connotations the same word holds in the English language.

I seem to recall also that I mentioned it is standard practice in France to formalise a request for payment, frequently by means of a 'recorded delivery' letter, thus simplifying any 'demand' for interest in the event of a delayed settlement.

 

 

[BTRFTG]

Invoices are a red herring. Was there a 'consideration' - clearly there was as the fees were disclosed. Was there 'mutuality of understanding', well the two contracting parties exchanged signed-contract copies and sent them for registration which, er, suggests there was. Matters not the UEFA amended contract wasn't signed, the intention was clearly had Sala lived it would have been and that's an enforceable contract. Unless the reason for variation related to capability (i.e. he wasn't Nantes' to trade,) else the contract contained or induced illegality (standardisation of reporting fees are not likely a legal requirement rather they are likely to have tax implication,) then the signed and unsigned versions, for the purpose of intent, are moot.

[Montpelierblue]

5 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

With the greatest of respect, as much as I love a good Cardiff bashing, the entire affair is clearly considerably more complex than that. 

If only life was as simple as he makes out hey.....:laugh:

[Harry]

4 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

You've conflated a number of distinct legal issues. The prime issue discussed here is whether Cardiff had entered into contract with Nantes for Sala's services. It seems pretty clear they had, hence owe Nantes. Whether Cardiff insured the player's contract, life or travel is a matter for them and I suspect such insurances differ. I understand Cardiff hold generic travel insurance for all their employees (not specific individuals) whilst on official business. Could be Sala's personal injury, life or contract cover wouldn't commence until UEFA had ratified the deal, but that would be Cardiff's risk and is partly of their own making in the way they attempted to misdirect agents fees.

I rather hope Cardiff are hoist by their own petard. That by arguing he wasn't their player (despite having contracted for him) insurers who decline 'agreed' cover on the basis the revised contract wasn't signed argue Cardiff had no intention of enacting the insurance and therefore no cover was in place.....

On the insurance side of things, if Cardiff had travel insurance for their employees then this would strictly be for business purposes only. I’m sure the insurer would state that a flight to see friends and family would not be construed as ‘business’ purposes. 

With Life insurance, well in a previous workplace of mine I used to look after a number of Premier League clubs Group Life insurance policies. Generally the cover was £2m, some were a bit higher at £4m. This was a few years ago so the cover levels may well have increased but certainly not to the tune of the £15m fee. 

The cover on the policy would not have had to be notified and agreed by the insurer, the way it worked was that any ‘new entrants’ are covered immediately upon joining the club (the admin gets done later, but cover is in place on day 1). So the insurer is liable as long as he was a Cardiff player. I guess that is what they’re arguing over, ie whether he was legally an employee of Cardiff on his date of death. 

Likewise I also looked after the PFA’s life insurance arrangement. So if Sala had been registered with the PFA prior to his date of death he’d also be covered for up to £2m with them. 

[REDOXO]

Are they going after each other Cardiff and Nantes under English/Welsh Law or French Law or some other jurisdiction? 
 

 

[downendcity]

37 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Are they going after each other Cardiff and Nantes under English/Welsh Law or French Law or some other jurisdiction? 
 

After the recent Brexit case, I reckon Cardiff will want to take it to the Scottish Courts, who will probably rule that Nantes owe Cardiff the transfer fee!

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, downendcity said:

After the recent Brexit case, I reckon Cardiff will want to take it to the Scottish Courts, who will probably rule that Nantes owe Cardiff the transfer fee!

Plus costs as clearly it’s a case of French protectionism!

[downendcity]

42 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Plus costs as clearly it’s a case of French protectionism!

Had they put the case to Speaker Bercow he would probably have judged that Cardiff should never have been relegated from the premier league.

[REDOXO]

33 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Had they put the case to Speaker Bercow he would probably have judged that Cardiff should never have been relegated from the premier league.

Of course not. The Druid minority rights are often overlooked. There should have been positive discrimination and an English team relegated.   

[BTRFTG]

14 hours ago, Harry said:

certainly not to the tune of the £15m fee. 

Good points all Harry, ditto had the transfer not been completed Sala doubtless would be covered by continuation of Nantes insurance. I'd also expect there to be liability in respect of minimum contract values (many employers continue to pay a percentage of income to relatives for a defined period.)

As you'll know, such policies invariably include exclusion clauses ( normally covering dangerous activities.) I've no idea whether the flight taken might be considered as such but there's lack of clarity as to the hire arrangements for the aircraft (was it a passenger hire?) Years back I used to hire 2 light aircraft each night shipping newspapers to and from Europe. Occasionally I'd decide to jump on board with the pilot though had something happened I wouldn't have been covered as that wasn't the purpose for which I'd contracted the flights.

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Are they going after each other Cardiff and Nantes under English/Welsh Law or French Law or some other jurisdiction? 
 

 

An interesting question.

FIFA are a global body not based in either, so I question whether either set of laws applicable in this instance- certainly in terms of a FIFA type sanction. Swiss law? CAS?

That said, this case is pretty unusual- but FIFA are based in Switzerland so any case should be heard there...

Edited November 7, 2019 by Mr Popodopolous

[Natchfever]

20 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Of course but the transfer would have been formally concluded from a legal standpoint. 

Was the transfer formally concluded at the point Sala died? I genuinely don’t know.

And even if it was, I imagine that Cardiff have been discussing it with their insurers to see if the insurer is on the hook for the fee. Has there ever been a precedent for this type of incident or is it unchartered territory from a legal/insurance perspective? Again, no idea.

There’s all sorts of shady angles on this story, so let’s not kid ourselves that it’s a simple situation for the sake of point scoring against a rival. It’s pretty poor taste when a man has lost his life. 

Agreed  and no one can say for certain that BCFC wouldn't have acted in exactly the same way as CCFC as uncomfortable as that may be to consider.

[Harry]

9 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Good points all Harry, ditto had the transfer not been completed Sala doubtless would be covered by continuation of Nantes insurance. I'd also expect there to be liability in respect of minimum contract values (many employers continue to pay a percentage of income to relatives for a defined period.)

As you'll know, such policies invariably include exclusion clauses ( normally covering dangerous activities.) I've no idea whether the flight taken might be considered as such but there's lack of clarity as to the hire arrangements for the aircraft (was it a passenger hire?) Years back I used to hire 2 light aircraft each night shipping newspapers to and from Europe. Occasionally I'd decide to jump on board with the pilot though had something happened I wouldn't have been covered as that wasn't the purpose for which I'd contracted the flights.

Indeed, had cover not commenced on the Cardiff policy, then there would be an argument that cover was still in place on the Nantes policy (if indeed they had one?). 

As for continued payments to relatives, you don’t tend to see too much of that nowadays - generally just a lump sum is covered. Many insurers pulled back from such ‘annuities’ a number of years ago - large capitalisation factors (and thus big payouts) were the norm but with years of low interest rates insurers weren’t getting bang for their buck and so had to pull back on offering such large and lengthy sums. Many firms who had ‘annuities’ covered were advised to remove this and instead increase the lump sum cover instead. 

As for exclusions, with the Life policies the football clubs held which I dealt with, there were no exclusions. Cover was offered to a certain value (ie £2m) with no questions asked. Exclusions would only ever be applied if an individual was medically underwritten for cover (where the insurer could look at lifestyle/hobbies as well as health, and potentially exclude dangerous sports or flying). The cover under the football policies was in place with no exclusions. 

[REDOXO]

11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

An interesting question.

FIFA are a global body not based in either, so I question whether either set of laws applicable in this instance- certainly in terms of a FIFA type sanction. Swiss law? CAS?

That said, this case is pretty unusual- but FIFA are based in Switzerland so any case should be heard there...

That’s kind of what I thought. If this is correct any meanderings on tort law need to be on the grounds of what Swiss law allows one would think. Any Swiss law scholars on here?

[reddoh]

On 06/11/2019 at 19:58, Harry said:

On the insurance side of things, if Cardiff had travel insurance for their employees then this would strictly be for business purposes only. I’m sure the insurer would state that a flight to see friends and family would not be construed as ‘business’ purposes. 

With Life insurance, well in a previous workplace of mine I used to look after a number of Premier League clubs Group Life insurance policies. Generally the cover was £2m, some were a bit higher at £4m. This was a few years ago so the cover levels may well have increased but certainly not to the tune of the £15m fee. 

The cover on the policy would not have had to be notified and agreed by the insurer, the way it worked was that any ‘new entrants’ are covered immediately upon joining the club (the admin gets done later, but cover is in place on day 1). So the insurer is liable as long as he was a Cardiff player. I guess that is what they’re arguing over, ie whether he was legally an employee of Cardiff on his date of death. 

Likewise I also looked after the PFA’s life insurance arrangement. So if Sala had been registered with the PFA prior to his date of death he’d also be covered for up to £2m with them. 

Wow why did you leave such an exciting place of work? was it for more money?

[Harry]

20 hours ago, reddoh said:

Wow why did you leave such an exciting place of work? was it for more money?

Redundancy, sadly. 

But it turned out ok and I’m earning more now anyway

Was interesting work though, particularly having sight of the player salaries!!

[reddoh]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Redundancy, sadly. 

But it turned out ok and I’m earning more now anyway

Was interesting work though, particularly having sight of the player salaries!!

glad for you, made redundant four times came out smiling each time but funnily enough the first was classed as a job for life but it pays a pension and not yet 55  

[formerly known as ivan]

To think this was nearly a year ago...

Cardiff planning to mark the occasion which I would understand fully it if wasn’t for all the shithousery that has gone on with them since.

Aren’t they refusing to pay any fee as he was never their player apparently.

Vile club.

Did they ever find the body of the pilot?

[Super]

7 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

To think this was nearly a year ago...

Cardiff planning to mark the occasion which I would understand fully it if wasn’t for all the shithousery that has gone on with them since.

Aren’t they refusing to pay any fee as he was never their player apparently.

Vile club.

Did they ever find the body of the pilot?

No they didnt find the body. Not sure this is worth going over again.

[downendcity]

On 20/01/2020 at 21:07, formerly known as ivan said:

To think this was nearly a year ago...

Cardiff planning to mark the occasion which I would understand fully it if wasn’t for all the shithousery that has gone on with them since.

Aren’t they refusing to pay any fee as he was never their player apparently.

Vile club.

Did they ever find the body of the pilot?

From the BBC website.

Cardiff's way of marking the occasion is a little "unusual"!

Cardiff City has passed on details to prosecutors in France to consider whether FC Nantes has a case to answer over the death of Emiliano Sala.

The Argentine, 28, and his pilot died when their plane from France to Wales crashed in the sea on 21 January 2019.

The Bluebirds have refused to pay a £15m transfer fee to the French club and said "sufficient evidence of wrongdoing" has been found.

Nantes said the club was "absolutely stunned" by the move.

The Piper Malibu N264DB carrying Sala and pilot David Ibbotson went missing over waters near the Channel Islands on 21 January. It took rescuers two weeks to find the wreckage.

The footballer's body was recovered on 8 February after a private rescue team took over the search.

The body of Mr Ibbotson, from Crowle in Lincolnshire, has never been found.

[Guest]

I just read the story myself, and it seems they will do anything possible if it helps them out of not paying up. The way they have conducted themselves (bar straight after the incident) has been disgusting, and as much as we would blame them as a club, I would guess most of their fans would think the same as well.

[wendyredredrobin]

I think that following this awful event, anyone doing transfer business with Cardiff will need to demand cash up front.

Their behaviour seems pretty appalling to me.

[Keyred]

I used to think that Cardiff weren't that dissimilar a club to ourselves (yeah I know, Welsh, sheep-shaggers etc) but their behaviour over the tragic Sala affair is more than reprehensible, it's unforgivable.

If we were in a similar situation (heaven forbid) I would expect Steve Lansdown and the club to honour the agreement and I believe they would. Hopefully that belief will never be tested.

I would hope that the people of Cardiff and supporters of the club do not agree with the owner/board in this situation and would make their feelings known. I won't, however, be holding my breath.

Sadly I have to concur that in this instance especially, Cardiff are indeed a vile club.

[cidercity1987]

Absolute scumbags, I would be horrified if we acted in such a way as Caerdydd

[Natchfever]

8 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

Absolute scumbags, I would be horrified if we acted in such a way as Caerdydd

The thing is, we have absolutely no idea whether we would act that way or not.

I daresay Cardiff fans would have expressed disgust if another club had acted like that pre Sala.

Clubs are generally run on financial lines and the right thing doesn't always come into it, if financially it isn't the right thing for the club.

100% not saying that's the right way to be incidentally, just that I don't think any other club can be all righteous about such things unless they have been in a similar position.

[Lanterne Rouge]

I wonder if this played a part in NW`s decision to leave. Did he know what was coming and wanted no part of it? He is a decent man and I could see him thinking this sort of thing to be morally wrong.