Benjamin Mendy - City lose case and Mendy awarded £11m in back pay (p168)

It wasn’t city’s fault he was arrested. Why should they pay him for the period he wasn’t available to play? If he was wrongfully arrested and imprisoned sue the police or the accusers
It depends on when he was available to play. He may have been eligible to play between his being charged and his trial, minus the period on remand.

City might have said to him that they didn’t want him to. If that is the case, then he’ll get at least some of his money.

All we will hear from here is that City and Mendy have agreed a severance settlement. Both parties wish the best for each other, moving forwards.
 
Found not guilty. Deserves compensation from some party. If not from the accusers, then from the employer as he has been suspended immediately following the rape charges. Nothing wrong about that.
It's a totally different level of proof.

In court he was being tried for very serious offences, and would only be found guilty if the jury were absolutely sure - as in 99 or 100% sure.

To be suspended without pay, the offences most likely wouldn't need to be anything like as serious as rape. And more importantly, if it went to court, the club would only need to show they were 51% sure (and an employment lawyer would be able to confirm this, but it's even possible that they may have an even easier case - simply showing they followed the correct procedures when deciding to suspend him, and that what they did was reasonable in the circumstances).

Similarly with his accusers. In court, for him to be found guilty there had to be almost no doubt whatsoever. A jury could be pretty sure, or think a defendant is probably guilty, and still they'd have to find them not guilty, as they need to be certain - that 99/100% again. If he tried to sue his accusers, it would come down to two people telling their stories and then who was most believable.
 
Should he not be suing the police/CPS instead?
He wasn’t paid cos he wasn’t available to play and the reason for that is not down to City.
No, the criminal system doesn’t work that way. The authorities wouldn’t risk taking most cases to court if they thought that they were responsible for lost wages and compensation. And anyway, that money would have to come from us, the taxpayers, so isn’t a good idea really.

Generally, for highly paid sportsmen and women, they could have insurance to cover lost earnings due to malicious accusations but even in this case they might not pay out due to his admission of unsavoury behaviour.
 
No, the criminal system doesn’t work that way. The authorities wouldn’t risk taking most cases to court if they thought that they were responsible for lost wages and compensation. And anyway, that money would have to come from us, the taxpayers, so isn’t a good idea really.

Generally, for highly paid sportsmen and women, they could have insurance to cover lost earnings due to malicious accusations but even in this case they might not pay out due to his admission of unsavoury behaviour.
Let’s hope City have insurance then.
 
He - and probably his agent too - are probably rich guys and will have taken advice from lawyers - and that may have been free of charge anyway as the PFA might cover some or all of his legal bills - providing that there is advice that he has a reasonably strong claim. I doubt very much that it'll ever get to a court hearing.
When did a lawyer or solicitor say you've a totally unwinnable case when they will get paid irrespective of the result?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.