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

A bizarre HR/legal decision to withhold the money.
Similar to Horny Huw at the boob, where they correctly paid it (to much mob derision). The presumption of innocence is sacrosanct - no matter the eventual outcome or how unsavoury the accused may be. Unfathomable stance.
 
A bizarre HR/legal decision to withhold the money.
Similar to Horny Huw at the boob, where they correctly paid it (to much mob derision). The presumption of innocence is sacrosanct - no matter the eventual outcome or how unsavoury the accused may be. Unfathomable stance.
Err I have no problem withholding the money - he couldn't fulfill the requirements of his contract at the time (had the club not suspended him could you imagine the reaction). It should have been set aside though.
The fact the payment issue went to court is daft - once proven innocent in a court of law he'd be entitled to it.
That's what the BBC should have done.
 
Err I have no problem withholding the money - he couldn't fulfill the requirements of his contract at the time (had the club not suspended him could you imagine the reaction). It should have been set aside though.
The fact the payment issue went to court is daft - once proven innocent in a court of law he'd be entitled to it.
That's what the BBC should have done.
Or if proven guilty - have to pay it back.
Right to suspend him obviously - but still have to pay when suspended - pending outcome.
Couldn't fulfil his requirements due to being jailed is clearlysubject to outcome.
Anyway - all academic now. The club were wrong. If not morally, then legally.
 
Or if proven guilty - have to pay it back.
Right to suspend him obviously - but still have to pay when suspended - pending outcome.
Couldn't fulfil his requirements due to being jailed is clearlysubject to outcome.
Anyway - all academic now. The club were wrong. If not morally, then legally.
Problem with that first sentence is there's no way he'd have been saving those wages in case he was guilty.
It's a tricky situation for organisations in the public eye imho.
 
A bizarre HR/legal decision to withhold the money.
Similar to Horny Huw at the boob, where they correctly paid it (to much mob derision). The presumption of innocence is sacrosanct - no matter the eventual outcome or how unsavoury the accused may be. Unfathomable stance.
We don’t know what his contract said, so it’s hard to take a moral stance on a legal matter.
 

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.