Fine of 718 thousand euros, but no further penalty in the standings. The Federal National Court has accepted the plea deal between Juventus and the Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the "salaries" process. And in Borsa the title celebrates gaining over 6% to €0,309 per share.
Juve: fines but no penalty
After the 10-point penalty imposed by the Football Federation's Court of Appeal for the capital gains case, the fear was that "another blow" would come. Instead, the Federal Court responded positively to the request for a plea bargain, presented following the agreement reached between the top management of the Juventus club and the agent Giuseppe Chinè.
As part of the second sporting trend linked toPrisma investigation of the Turin prosecutor's office, Juve will have to pay a fine of 718 thousand euros, but will not face a further penalty in the standings. expected fines also for individual executives: 47 thousand to Fabio Paratici, 35 thousand to Pavel Nedved, 32 thousand to Federico Cherubini, 18,5 thousand to Cesare Gabasio, 15 thousand to Paolo Morganti, 11,75 thousand to Giovanni Manna and 10 thousand to Stefano Braghin.
The decision of the Federal National Court thus closes all legal disputes, seeing that too the club would be ready to avoid the penalty appeal from 10 points, discounted in the current championship, in the case of capital gains.
Agnelli on trial on 15 June
The second device published on the website of the FIGC Court explains the position of the former Juventus president Andrea Agnelli was removed from the proceeding e postponed to the next hearing on 15 June. A choice that arises from the joint request, presented by Agnelli's lawyers and the federal prosecutor's office, "in order to obtain a postponement to continue the already advanced discussions, aimed at evaluating a proposal for an agreement". Practically, Agnelli did not want to sign the waiver of the appeal for capital gains and will therefore go to trial. All the other former executives have however renounced appeals both to the Court of Appeal of the FIGC and to the Coni Guarantee College.
Juve: "Plea bargain in the interests of the partners"
Juventus, “pur reaffirming the correctness of their actions and the legitimacy of its defensive arguments" decided to access the application of sanctions through a plea deal with the FIGC prosecutor "in the best interest of the company itself, of its shareholders and of all the stakeholders (both belonging to the world of sport and not)'. This is what can be read in the note released by the Juventus club, according to which, from this point of view, "the definition of all open FIGC sporting procedures allows the club to achieve a certain result, putting a firm point and overcoming the state of tension and instability which would inevitably arise from the continuation of disputes with uncertain outcomes and deadlines".
This will also allow management, the first team coach and the players to “focus on sports activity and in particular on the overall planning for next season (both with reference to sports activities and as regards business relations with sponsors, other commercial and financial counterparts)”.
Gravina: "Football has found serenity"
Immediately after the decision of the TFN, the president of the FIGC spoke, Gabriel Gravina: “There is a moment for verification, assessments and judgments, but there is also a moment for deciding and look to the future with greater serenity, a moment for planning. Everything, in compliance with the rules. This last act is foreseen by our rules, by the desirable and shared code of sporting justice. I think it's the best result for Italian football to have found a moment of serenity. We speak of sports justice – continued the number one of the Football Federation – not in a precise way. Our justice is fast, punctual, rigorous. And I believe that within 30 days, with the terms that have been set, it will finish its journey”.
The motivations of the capital gains trend
In addition to the decision of the Tfn, the reasons for the sentence with which the Federal Court of Appeal, in the context of the capital gains process, inflicted on the club 10 penalty points in the standings.
"The sanction of the penalty of 10 (ten) points in the standings to be served in the current sporting season, even from an equitable point of view, proves to be entirely suitable for satisfying the criteria of afflictiveness, proportionality and reasonableness”. The penalty was commensurate with the responsibilities of individual managers, the FIGC Court in fact used "a criterion for attributing the relative personal responsibilities" which is reflected in the quantum of the sanction to be imposed on the sports association.
Why did we go from -15 to -10? Because the acquittal of the other board members without signature resulted in a 5-point discount compared to the -15 initially imposed. In fact, the "causal contribution" of non-operating executives has not been proven.
