Valencia Court of First Instance No. 1 has since last July 11 on the table a letter from Prensa Ibérica, a newspaper of the same Editorial Group, seeking injunctive measures against Superdeporte. Valencia CF is in urgent demand. The risk of “economic bankruptcy” and “dissolution” location.
The letter sent to the court is based on an expert report on the patrimonial status of the club. The judge decided to allocate 100 million euros in funds for the lawsuit that will be prosecuted if the sale of the majority stake to Meriton Holdings in 2014 is invalid.. Although there is currently a preliminary hearing on February 16, a hearing will be held in the City of Justice on September 7 at 09:30, following the lawsuit filed by the Jaime Navarro Lawyers office on behalf of a member of the Mestalla club.
In the previous hearing, the Foundation and Meriton curiously demanded the said provision, worth 100 million, which could be Damocles’ sword, implying that it entered into the cause of termination. This is an amount that corresponds to the price of the shares and Meriton has to respond by June 30, during a lawsuit that could certainly take several years. However, since the plaintiff did not know what the consequences of the cancellation would be, he considered the amount to be uncertain and did not make any claim.
The expert report on which the judicial administration request is based for Valencia CF refers to the fact that the club’s own auditors stated that its assets were reduced by 10,238,000 euros due to losses from previous years. This figure is less than half of the 21,591,000 capital, which is a “ground for termination” in itself. The auditors also add that there were 23,883,000 contingencies that were not responded to because club management did not think the events leading up to them “would happen”.
The data analyzed by the expert is as of 30 June 2021, before the capital increase on 16 December, when 6,249,939 shares were issued. It should be noted that with this injection, the capital increased by 37,499,000. The equity imbalance has been resolved, but now the unmet provision has been added and the estimated loss of about 50 million, which Layhoon made public a few weeks ago.
The lawsuit alleges that Valencia CF was “sold without the buyer incurring any economic, social, sporting or liability obligations”. It was also denounced that the sale was “absolutely opaque” and why Meriton Holdings was chosen and “other applicants were rejected”, even if it was never, even “minimal”.
Jaime Navarro adds that “the defendants themselves and voluntarily put the VCF on a serious cause for its express dissolution, since these days they have a capital of 59 million euros () the club admits at least 50 losses in the fiscal year. just closed, 06/30/22».
According to these calculations, losses as a result of the “extraordinary disposal of an entire VCF without the buyer incurring a single obligation or condition” amount to 150 million. It is also alleged that “if precautionary measures are not taken, there will be an obvious danger of the club disappearing and nothing will be taken back, which is the main purpose of this case”.
Another of the allegations is that the only document submitted by the defendant was the document regarding the purchase of the shares, and that “for further sarcasm and confusion, a number that could only correspond to a NIE was displayed as Meriton’s NIF”. We are also warned that “this buyer’s domicile is not in Singapore, as we are always wrongly told, but in the Hong Kong tax haven and the so-called ‘Site’, which is the residence of numerous offshore’ companies».
In the same deed, it is acknowledged that “Meriton Holdings does not even have a corporate purpose, and on page 14 it is stated that there are a number of assigned shares for which the mandatory title of ownership is missing, in case of very few shortcomings. ..». The request also includes “millionaire loans, benefits, guarantees or public subsidies that VCF has received from the majority state shareholder Bankia or the Valencia Institute of Finance; With what is verified, it remains in accordance with the art. Section 3 of the Transparency and Good Governance Act, other compliant and enforceable, should and should transparently communicate requested and requested details about essentially why Meriton Holdings was chosen and other interested parties excluded. VCF».
This newspaper has contacted the club, which does not want to release its version officially.. Other sources interviewed indicate that the case will not last very long, but what will happen at the hearing when the magistrate hears the statements of the parties remains to be seen.