Genoa – He also appeared in the judicial dispute that still pits the old and new owners of Sampdoria Gianluca Vidalwith a simplified appeal (ex art. 281) to the Court of Milan with which the ex trustee of Sampdoria requests to ascertain and declare the nullity of the private agreements stipulated last 12 and 13 June by Sports and Entertainment Holding (Ssh), with Sampdoria, its parent company Blucerchiati Spa and the reference companies of Matteo Manfredi and Andrea Radrizzani, namely Gestio Capital Limited (therefore the English branch, not Luxembourg) and Aser Group Holding Pte. Limited. And “for this reason, order them to return to Sport e Spettacolo Holding all that was the subject of the transfer with these documents”. Meaning what, cancel the sale of the Sampdoria club bringing it back into the availability of Ssh, attributable to the Ferreros but whose sole shareholder is legally the trust.
The designated judge, Daniela Marconi of the XV civil section specialized in business matters, has scheduled the appearance of the parties at the hearing on May 28th at 12pm for today. In short, there is no peace surrounding the change of ownership of Sampdoria. Without going into the merits, certainly this initiative by Vidal presented four months after those hectic days of May/June does not bring serenity to the environment. Vidal acted on behalf of his Trust Service, the sole shareholder of Ssh and which in fact administered the “Rosan” trust where Sampdoria had been cocooned, within that plan which envisaged making the Ferreros' Roman concordats available to the money from the sale of the club. And in the end Vidal, the person in charge of this sale, after months and dozens of negotiations, both real and fake, in the end with a blitz in Doha had committed to closing the most controversial one, the one with Francesco Di Silvio and the “famous” Khaled Al Thani, who had created problems in general and was divisive for the fans.
The feeling is that in this legal initiative of his Vidal acted independently, without sharing it with the Ferreros' lawyers. In fact, in the Ssh appeal she is cited as a “necessary litigant”, that is, necessarily, as she is directly involved. The Court of Milan is the third to have to rule on aspects of the sale of Sampdoria, after Genoa last summer for the appeal presented by Ssh Holding against Sampdoria (with the intervention of Blucerchiati Spa) and closed with its rejection. And after Rome for the summons presented by the Dla Piper firm, which assists Manfredi, against Ssh with a request for damages of 5,250,000 euros, a hearing currently set for March 22nd.
In the appeal presented in Milan, Vidal (through lawyers Alberto Tedoldi and Sonia Angeli) states that there would have been no consent from Ssh, Sampdoria's majority shareholder, to the transfer of the shares, pointing the finger at Massimo Ienca, sole director of Ssh at the time, who would have acted “in collusive competition”, terminology heavy also often used in corruption or mafia trials, with the investors, with Manfredi and Radrizzani and Sampdoria itself. And against the board of directors of the time Lanna, Romei, Panconi and Bosco, for this reason citing Alessandro Barnaba, the other person who aimed to take over the club. He recalled how Barnaba in the meeting of 30 May underlined how the Doria Board of Directors had accepted the proposal of the investors (Manfredi and Radrizzani) preferring it to a competitor (Barnaba's) on assumptions that were not fulfilled and in the absence of an agreement with Ssh. In the meantime, contacts continue between the lawyer Francesco De Gennaro (Dla Piper) who assists Manfredi and Radrizzani and the lawyer Pier Emilio Sammarco of Ferrero, to arrive at a definitive economic settlement agreement between the parties: among the pending matters there is also money that Ferrero he should have already received and did not receive, the mortgages on the old headquarters of Corte Lambruschini now owned by the former owner and also the property of the “Baciccia”.
Agreement which also involves the cessation of any legal and non-legal dispute. Thus making the company “cleaner” in the eyes of new investors. —
#Sampdoria #Vidal #asks #court #return #club #Ferrero
