Agnelli wins the appeal to the TAR on the case capital gains: now the ball is in the European Court’s court
Now the questions will be presented to the European Court. The appeal Of Andrea Angelli was accepted by the Regional Administrative Court, regarding the capital gains case last year which involved the then president of Juventus, who then resigned together with the entire board of directors as soon as the news relating to the case was leaked.
A wave that had hit her very hard Juventuswhich at the end of the year after the capital gain case had also seen itself reduced not only in the club and in the club’s top management, but also on the pitch, with that penalty first given, then removed, then given again at the end of the championship which had extinguished any European ambition – except after confirmation of UEFA of exclusion from all competitions for one year -.
Now, as per the provisions, the TAR passes the ball to review the positions of Angelli and Arrivabene at the European Court. Here’s what will happen now.
Agnelli, appeal approved by the TAR
Now the case will move to Luxembourg, with the same TAR having found, as reported by Tuttosport, some anomalies in the trials for the capital gain case. Meanwhile, the appeal of Andrea Agnelli and Maurizio Arrivabene was approved in the last few hours.
There European Court of Justice he will now have to express his opinion on the matter, and it will be important to follow the subsequent sentences also with regards to the entire football system. Yes, because in the event of a review, an important piece of the investigation reopened between 2022 and 2023 would collapse.
The TAR’s doubts
If the Constitutional Court with the previous two sentences having established that sports justice could be practiced autonomously, without the possibility of recourse to ordinary justice, the TAR casts doubt on what was also recognized in 2023 by the European Court.
The questions therefore, summarizing the appeal approved, which concerns very large economic interests and the lives of professional and non-professional people, cannot remain within the scope of sports justice, but a court should discuss the issue. The TAR also called on sports justice to be clearer on article 4, which can impose heavy penalties with its “duty to loyalty and sporting probity”.
The theme therefore remains that of the relationship between ordinary and sporting justice, the Court therefore asked itself whether sporting justice in full compliance with European laws is capable of influencing the lives and careers of workers in such a heavy way.
