bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
What about the repeated Covid breaches after the club warned him and while he was under police investigation. Gross misconduct?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Benjamin Mendy - City lose case and Mendy awarded £11m in back pay (p168)
- Thread starter awest
- Start date
They have more than likely paid the money into a separate account gaining interest waiting for it to be claimed or a settlement agreed.Then I’d assume a) we’d have insurance for such instances and b) whatever I think about him as a man, he’s likely due full back pay.
I reckon the clubs will settle quick as his friends still play at the club. Playing hardball would be bad for moral.
He was very stupid to be honest and after he'd been charged he should have kept his head down and not thrown more parties.
Once charged on 26 Aug 21 he was detained until Jan 22 and then bailed. He didn't breach bail conditions after the charges once released as far as the press are aware.Im sure thats incorrect. He was charged and put out om conditional bail, which he breached and so was rearrested, and the court then put him on remand
I don't think anyone doubts he was stupid have a parties breaching pre-trial charge bail conditions and allowing more mud to be slung at him, and maybe forced the had of the Police to charge him earlier.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
He carried on the sex and drugs parties while on bail. Cleared of rape but certainly enough to lose your job.Im sure thats incorrect. He was charged and put out om conditional bail, which he breached and so was rearrested, and the court then put him on remand
blue b4 the moon
Well-Known Member
As you'll be well aware married rags/single rags are still more than capable of 'putting it' around.I don't like praising Ferguson, but one thing he always wanted was for his players to be settled and married as soon as possible. I think he thought it to be a way of preventing players acting the dickhead. Obviously it's not 100% perfect, but there's some positives to that approach.
However, a negative we've seen at City is that wives seem to want to live somewhere warmer/nicer than Manchester..!
cleavers
Moderator
He was released on bail after he was originally arrested (presumably with some bail conditions), he was subsequently re-arrested. I haven't followed the time line of it all, but bail starts after arrest and questioning, not after charges are made.Once charged on 26 Aug 21 he was detained until Jan 22 and then bailed. He didn't breach bail conditions after the charges once released as far as the press are aware.
I don't think anyone doubts he was stupid have a parties breaching pre-trial charge bail conditions and allowing more mud to be slung at him, and maybe forced the had of the Police to charge him earlier.
cleavers
Moderator
Drugs ? Have you any proof of that ?He carried on the sex and drugs parties while on bail. Cleared of rape but certainly enough to lose your job.
Gray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 May 2004
- Messages
- 25,447
- Team supported
- ABU & The Bus Wreckers
Looked like he was on drugs at that Wolves away match.Drugs ? Have you any proof of that ?
Yes it did in his case, and ended when arrested and finally charged. Then was denied bail after charges for 4 months or so then bailed again.He was released on bail after he was originally arrested (presumably with some bail conditions), he was subsequently re-arrested. I haven't followed the time line of it all, but bail starts after arrest and questioning, not after charges are made.
If he's entitled to it he should get it. The guy lost his career
Chase away.
Whilst I have sympathy with him following his acquittal and damage to his career and reputation, I’m certain we will have been advised by lawyers that terminating his contract was well within our rights.
For me this is one of those, the (contract) law is the law and whatever the lawyers work up will be what it is. It is beyond right or wrong as simple principles, it is probably too complex for that.
There will be mechamism for this, who gets what and who ultimately pays or loses out.
As long as it doesn't get forced into becoming a distraction.
He was still under contract to City until 30 June this year (we know this because that’s when he went to the Released List). So that means we never considered him in breach of contract/terminated the contract earlier.
If that’s the case, now he has been found not guilty, it’s hard to see how we don’t owe him wages for at least the period when he was available to train and play (remand feels more difficult for him). Can’t really see the counter argument here unless we had a specific contractual clause dealing with arrest, charge and being found not guilty.
Suspect it will be settled without litigation.
If that’s the case, now he has been found not guilty, it’s hard to see how we don’t owe him wages for at least the period when he was available to train and play (remand feels more difficult for him). Can’t really see the counter argument here unless we had a specific contractual clause dealing with arrest, charge and being found not guilty.
Suspect it will be settled without litigation.