[ad_1]
Lakis Simaioforidis was presented at Metropolis 95.5 and on the “Plaka Epirat” program with Giorgos Zairis and Giannis Pagos.
The renowned lawyer referred to the open cases that exist for PAOK and Aris, as well as the way in which CAS judges, as well as other details on the judicial front.
Among other things, what he said in Metropolis 95.5:
On developments in PSAP: “It just came to our attention then. Once again, soccer faces an oversight problem. If there were institutions, they had to deal with the problems that we will face from the get-go. All of this shows irresponsibility and all parties should have had their Ready proposals In early March, the decision was made to ban players from appealing until 6/31 for pre-existing debts, at a time when players who have had to pay since October do not receive their money for crown which came in March. The suggestion made to the players is based on the philosophy that we don’t have a good relationship with footballers but that they want to give less and get more. “
Regarding the BAN of Mars and the hopes of justification: “There is a very serious problem and responsibilities should not be blamed Mars based on common sense. The EPO issued the Durmisai newsletter despite the fact that they had documents in their hands that. For his part, Aris is correct when he invokes that all of this weighs on an older SAP, while the EPO he had to not issue the player’s card or if he did he would revoke it directly. Is it the responsibility of the person who wants to issue the card or the person who issues it? If I were a legal advisor to Mars, I’d say “we’ll stop here” and not make the transfer. For him FIFA Greece is a “bad boy” and Mars would have to challenge the first decision not to get to this point with the BAN. What the EPO says when it comes to FIFA and UEFA does not matter, as these decisions are binding. There are cases where national legislation may be taken into account. If Mars is justified after the player’s contracts have expired, you can get an extension in the Mars transfer window if it’s justified later than the expiration date of the contracts.
Regarding developments in CAS: ««The CAS applies the law by which a decision was issued, in this case the FIFA law, and can sometimes examine the law of each country, giving hope to the case. The CAS has a specified time to make a decision, but it is at its discretion and cannot be pressured. I consider that the Commission, in order to allow the Appeals Committee, to consider it in essence and return the decision to it. The details of your case PAOK The CAS can take them, but what the EEC has decided is not binding. FIFA regulations prohibited Apollon Kalamaria from using the player and not transferring him. ”
For Olympiacos open case: “If one has a legitimate interest, one can appeal against the other. This can happen since the institutions are interested in the essence of things to protect their product.”
