[ad_1]
Can declare " calm " with respect to the question that was raised with Lazaros Christodoulopoulos but Piraeus continues to arrive at
] As we wrote in Yesterday's report it is considered important that in the port they did not know, there seems to be a tripartite agreement between AEK which states that Greek aces were acquired through a loan process for the first two years, with an option for the purchase and automatic renewal of his contract for another year (the third) . Unless they know it, and for reasons that they know best as a legal department, and even a top, they did not consider it so important.
On the other hand, we consider a strong negotiating document for the Union, at the same time as, in the "black and white" camp, there was a problem. other evidence justifying them case and will show them soon.
In Olympic however, they bet on the fact that " AEK did not file a new contract " and they are supposed to go to court. However, the treaty submitted by the Union for the three parties (AEK-Lazaros-Verona) has of force and gives "advantage" to "black-yellows" according to what 39, they say in the Union.
Meanwhile, a reasonable question that arises and can play its role concerns the loan of Lazaros Christodoulopoulos to AEK for two years, something that has not not known until now. When the international bourgeoisie signed in Verona, no contract was announced. He signed 2014 and 2016 when he left for AEK . If so, how did the Union borrow it for two years, as it now claims and as it says (we do not doubt) the agreement tripartite? A reasonable question that complicates things even more and that should be solved in the hearing rooms …
[ad_2]
Source link
