The Antitrust is investigating the Dolci Preziosi Easter eggs branded by Chiara Ferragni, hypothesizing a practice similar to that of the Balocco pandoro case. This was declared by president Roberto Rustichelli, interviewed by Bruno Vespa on Porta a Porta. “We received three reports that highlighted critical issues, we started the case in January with inspections by the Financial Police and the hypothesis we are proceeding with is the same, an unfair commercial practice with possible false information”, he explained. Meanwhile, Fedez, guest of Francesca Fagnani, declared that the blame for the so-called Pandoro Gate lies not only with his wife: “Chiara could have managed the situation better, everyone sees the bad faith: I’m sure there is no bad faith. She chose to take all the responsibilities. He could and should have explained that the responsibilities are not all his. Even the managers? Of one manager, just one.”
Why did Chiara Ferragni decide not to comment on her manager Fabio Maria Damato, who is also under investigation for aggravated fraud? This is the question posed by Myrta Merlino on Pomeriggio Cinque, the information and current affairs programme. It was Sara Manfuso who spoke: “The manager will be forced to assume his responsibilities because he is under investigation. There is an objective fact”, she began. The commentator raised a doubt in the studio: “The story becomes more intricate. There is the concept of co-responsibility. It’s not that we would have expected a buck-passing on the manager, but not saying a word makes us think that you’re not talking about him because at that point he could say other things about her. These things happen in companies.”
