DETAILS OF BLUEBIRDS HUGE CLAIM AGAINST FC NANTES

The details of Cardiff City’s damages claim against Nantes over Emiliano Sala can be outlined today on the fifth anniversary of the tragedy that rocked the football world.
By Paul Abbandonato

The Bluebirds are seeking reimbursement of the £15million transfer fee, plus interest, that Vincent Tan had to pay Nantes to ensure FIFA and the Football League lifted what they felt was an unfair transfer embargo slapped upon Wales’ capital city club.

Cardiff are also seeking damages of £60million plus interest for loss of revenue after being relegated from the Premier League into the Championship.

It is our understanding a respected independent company which specialises in statistics has put together a detailed numbers breakdown based on the balance of probability over whether Sala would have scored enough goals to keep Cardiff in the top flight.

Neil Warnock’s men were relegated by a whisker in 2019, finishing third from bottom and just two points behind Brighton in 17th place. Southampton were a further three points better off and Burnley four.

No-one can say for certain if Sala would have kept Cardiff in the Premier League, but the conclusion from the statistical company is that he is highly likely to have done so. His scoring record of a goal every three games for Nantes in the French League, and a goal every two matches for previous clubs Orleans and Niort, was impressive and the feeling is he would have shone in the English league too.

Cardiff’s case, which is being pursued for them by Capital Law, is to be held in the French civil courts. Intriguingly it will be heard in the city of Nantes itself, rather than France’s capital Paris.

That decision to head straight into the lions’ den, the Nantes Commercial Court, could be viewed as an indication of the growing confidence Cardiff have with their legal action.

Crucially three business people will sit in judgement, rather than traditional judges. Because of their own financial backgrounds, they might be more minded to assess the balance of probabilities, and the potential cost to Cardiff, rather than simply focus upon straight legal arguments.


It could yet be that Cardiff and Nantes opt to settle out of court before the full hearing takes place some time towards the end of the year. However, as things stand, the French club are showing no sign of backing down and say they plan to vigorously contest Cardiff’s action.

Cardiff filed papers to the French court last summer. The case is being run jointly by Capital Law, based in Cardiff, and French legal firm Vigiué Schmidt & Associés. It centres around the involvement of agent Willie McKay in the transfer. He was quizzed at the Sala inquest in Bournemouth about his involvement in organising the doomed flight.

Nantes defended Cardiff’s action in November by responding that McKay was not acting for them as an agent in the Sala deal.

The Bluebirds will in turn respond to that by March and separately are also suing McKay in the Cardiff division of the High Court.

This is not for money, but to explore if there is a footprint of any correspondence the agent may have had with Nantes, including phone records, emails, texts and WhatsApp messages. This is under something called a Norwich Pharmacal Order, in effect a court order for disclosure of documents or information.

As such, they withheld the first instalment due to Nantes of £5million.

However, FIFA eventually ruled that the transfer had been completed and slapped a transfer embargo on the Bluebirds over non-payment. That was lifted from this month’s January window when Tan came up with the money in full to Nantes last July.

Cardiff had also asked the Swiss-based Court of Arbitration of Sport to rule on the matter, but the legal body felt it didn’t have the jurisdiction to overturn FIFA’s decision. Tan then appealed to the Swiss Federal Tribunal, but their judges deemed the Sala case, and who if anybody should compensate Cardiff for events which unfolded, must be dealt with by the civil courts only.

As such Cardiff are heading to the French court and believe they might receive a more sympathetic hearing this time.

FIFA were always going to look at the matter through the prism of football rules and thus penalised Cardiff.

The Bluebirds felt that was unfair, given the truly unique and tragic circumstances of what happened, and reserved the right to take the matter to a court of law in France. Given FIFA’s judgement, they can argue that Sala was indeed a club asset and are thus pursuing damages for what happened.

The worst-case scenario for Cardiff will be losing the case and having to potentially pay two sets of legal fees, Nantes’ as well as their own, with the matter then closed. The best-case scenario will be to win the entire case, which would mean a figure of £75million would suddenly come into the club.

A middle-case scenario would be Cardiff getting some of the transfer fee back, but no damages.

Another middle-case scenario would be an out-of-court settlement, with Nantes agreeing to a compromise figure which they might be able to claim from their own insurers.

However, even those last two would represent victory for Tan and Cardiff chairman Mehmet Dalman as the club would receive money. The Cardiff hierarchy continue to fight this matter as they feel strongly that the Bluebirds have been wronged throughout this process.

They have already won a legal battle with their own insurers Miller Insurances LLP, landing a substantial sum after saying the broker failed to properly communicate the process for immediately insuring new players.

Whichever way the French case goes, exactly five years after the tragedy the shadow of Emiliano Sala still looms large over Cardiff City and Nantes. The Bluebirds feel it is a matter that is worth pursuing to the very end and, it seems, far more of their own fans are coming round to that way of thinking,

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Probably our fault, Nantes can do no wrong in the eyes of some of our supporters.

As much I see the logic. I don't think it'll stand in court. It's all down to absolutes not maybes.

That's not bad going. Think I mentioned £80-100m in one of my previous posts.

These financial forensic investigators are really quite good. I used one of them when I was representing ex Southampton footballers in a football abuse case years ago. And, in a court room situation, they can be very pursuasive.

Nantes (or Nantes insurers) might be digging there heals in but, at the moment, they can do so. It's a negotiation position. I think they realise that they will be paying something they just want to negotiate as low as possible.

I am a betting man and I reckon this will settle for something in the region of £35-40m in our favour plus the settlement previously agreed

The fact that we are even in this situation demonstrates what a clown show set up we are.

That's not bad going. Think I mentioned £80-100m in one of my previous posts.

These financial forensic investigators are really quite good. I used one of them when I was representing ex Southampton footballers in a football abuse case years ago. And, in a court room situation, they can be very pursuasive.

Nantes (or Nantes insurers) might be digging there heals in but, at the moment, they can do so. It's a negotiation position. I think they realise that they will be paying something they just want to negotiate as low as possible.

I am a betting man and I reckon this will settle for something in the region of £35-40m in our favour plus the settlement previously agreed

FC Nantes apart, I think everyone, including Vincent Tan, would be a tad happy with that outcome, Paul...

The fact that we are even in this situation demonstrates what a clown show set up we are.

Explain please?

This is the least we deserve in damages.

The fact that we are even in this situation demonstrates what a clown show set up we are.

Explain please?

We're all waiting for the response to that comment, Jules...

Should be interesting...!

As much I see the logic. I don't think it'll stand in court. It's all down to absolutes not maybes.

Not in the civil courts.

The burden of proof in civil courts is “on the balance of probabilities” unlike the criminal courts which is “beyond reasonable doubt”. That is massive in this case.

It will be interesting, particularly as this won’t be decided by a judge, as in this country, but by business men. I wouldn’t like to call this one.

Also, as I've suggested in other posts, if a person is found guilty in criminal proceedings (as Willie mckay was) then, in UK law, he is automatically guilty in civil proceedings. Many countries operate the same way.

All we need to prove is that WM acted as an agent for Nantes and that part of his agency work involved arranging transport - irrespective as to whether that was by car, train or flights.

If there is then Nantes are vicariously liable for his actions and it is likely his insurers will more than likely settle at some point

Also, as I've suggested in other posts, if a person is found guilty in criminal proceedings (as Willie mckay was) then, in UK law, he is automatically guilty in civil proceedings. Many countries operate the same way.

All we need to prove is that WM acted as an agent for Nantes and that part of his agency work involved arranging transport - irrespective as to whether that was by car, train or flights.

If there is then Nantes are vicariously liable for his actions and it is likely his insurers will more than likely settle at some point

Paul, do you think that any incriminating paper trail is still around, surely those involved will have shredded everything.

We will lose this case.

We will lose this case.

McKay arranged this tragic flight outside his dealing with Nantes and I believe that is where we will lose it.

We will lose this case.

McKay arranged this tragic flight outside his dealing with Nantes and I believe that is where we will lose it.

That's not true he acted as the selling agent for Nantes there's plenty of documentation from McKay himself to prove that they were using unlicensed agents, hence the French authorities going after nantes that's the point Nantes like it or not are connected.

We will lose this case.

Didn't you say that about going after the insurers and they settled in our favour.

I do love the Cardiff City Forum, Butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers but we are all French civil law case experts Talented bunch


I work in a factory, I haven't got a clue, just hope we win and win big

We will lose this case.

Sadly I say the same Ned and stand by it.

I got smashed when I said we would lose all the original cases and will yet again be, but the same people then disappear.

We will lose this case.

Sadly I say the same Ned and stand by it.

I got smashed when I said we would lose all the original cases and will yet again be, but the same people then disappear.

You said we would lose suing the insurance company and we won , I think we got a better case here Nantes will have to pay us out of court I think .

Agree wez, out of court settlement.
With no parties admitting loss or guilt.

Agree wez, out of court settlement.
With no parties admitting loss or guilt.

I think we will get our transfer fee back and a bit more .

I do love the Cardiff City Forum, Butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers but we are all French civil law case experts Talented bunch


I work in a factory, I haven't got a clue, just hope we win and win big

Well said llan, exactly how I feel and have always felt. I don't have a scooby how this will all end.

We will lose this case.

Sadly I say the same Ned and stand by it.

I got smashed when I said we would lose all the original cases and will yet again be, but the same people then disappear.

Annis , to try and form a proper view on these legal cases , you need to have read publicly filed documents like the FIFA and CAS rulings plus the decision of the Swiss Federal Tribunal. They are lengthy and complex documents but set out facts which clarify what actually happened and why CCFC were not successful in earlier legal cases. I have read them both in detail and used them to form my following views.

When the case went to FIFA I thought the club would win. I was wrong. Having then read all of the evidence set out in the decision it was clear that CCFC had messed up some some important elements of the transfer documentation and the deal as a whole. Firstly, Neil Warnock should never have been allowed by the owner to deal with Willie McKay at all and certainly not have pressed ahead with a record signing in terms of transfer fee and salary. Secondly, the club should have made it a condition of the transfer that no fee was payable unless and until the player`s contract was accepted by the Premier League in which CCFC were playing at the time (the EPL rejected the contract submitted by the Club Secretary as containing clauses unacceptable under their rules).

The case going to CAS was a twofold attempt to firstly say FIFA were wrong on the documentation point then secondly to say, even if FIFA were right, to say that no transfer fee was payable until a separate linked legal claim against Nantes for damages was finalised. On the first point they agreed with FIFA. On the second point they didn`t give any consideration to the separate claim against Nantes saying it was outside their powers to decide such things.

When the appeal went to the Swiss Federal Tribunal they said that they agreed that CAS didn`t have the power to look at the damages claim as well as the football transfer itself which was a matter they said CCFC had to pursue separately, which they now have been doing.

The current action against Nantes follows on from their defence claim lodged in the French court at the end of November 2023 effectively saying that they don`t know Willie McKay and that he was nothing to do with them. I think most impartial observers would agree that this is clearly a nonsense, hence the club pursuing Willie McKay for the release of documents and social media content .If shown that he did act for Nantes then they are in serious trouble under French legislation. Further details about this are set out in Abbo`s very good report on Twitter which was copied and pasted earlier in this thread. He and I spoke about this matter a few days ago and his research of the facts is consistent with mine. Doesn`t mean either of us are right but the records we both researched independently come up with the same facts.

As we all now know the club took a successful legal action against their insurance brokers on the basis that they had given wrong advice and guidance on insuring a player asset. This could only be commenced after the rulings that ES was the club`s player and therefore an insurable asset. The amount of settlement is not known as it is subject to commercial confidentiality
but the club Finance Director has described to figure as very substantial.

All of this legal work is far from straightforward so no-one can fairly say either that CCFC will win the next court action or will lose it, in the latter case without at first having read all the relevant documentation which is out there. People are however quite entitled to their opinions on these things. I just wish they would look into things properly to enable them to best form those opinions.

Keith

That makes things so much clearer, Keith. Thank you.
What we need is a time scale for how long this sorry saga will take to be resolved.
Many of us long term supporters on this site are elderly- just like Tan - and don’t necessarily have many years left to see the club retain its rightful compensation which will hopefully be used to achieve promotion to the Premier League for many seasons, not merely a single year!
Tan may be a dictator, but he is our dictator!

I think we're in a catch 22 situation and that Tan has been really affected by the Sala death & in some way feels responsible and rather than money he wants the courts to somehow clear him of responsibility so until then he is not going anywhere. He may also be very wary of sanctioning big money or even mid money transfers because he again feels that he should have been more involved in said transfer and that maybe if he had been it would never have happened.

I know that most here hate him for the change of colour & won't let it go but spare a thought for what he may still be going through from the Sala death.

Then again he may just be a c*nt.

I think we're in a catch 22 situation and that Tan has been really affected by the Sala death & in some way feels responsible and rather than money he wants the courts to somehow clear him of responsibility so until then he is not going anywhere. He may also be very wary of sanctioning big money or even mid money transfers because he again feels that he should have been more involved in said transfer and that maybe if he had been it would never have happened.

I know that most here hate him for the change of colour & won't let it go but spare a thought for what he may still be going through from the Sala death.

Then again he may just be a c*nt.

I heard Tan has been very generous to the Sala family, for which he has not received any recognition.

Thank you Keith now everyone knows what really went and is going on.
Also we'll done the club for not just handing money over, hopefully we will be proved right and get reputation and money back.

The fact that we are even in this situation demonstrates what a clown show set up we are.

Explain please?

We're all waiting for the response to that comment, Jules...

Should be interesting...!

The real 'expert' must still be writing his valued response, as we've heard nuffink...!

Thanks, Keith for another well set out post that gives food for thought...

The fact that we are even in this situation demonstrates what a clown show set up we are.

Explain please?

We're all waiting for the response to that comment, Jules...

Should be interesting...!

The real 'expert' must still be writing his valued response, as we've heard nuffink...!

Crayons taken off him ?