In last week’s blog on the Suarez contract, specialist sports lawyer John Spyrou pointed out the difficulties that can be caused by ambiguities in players’ contracts. This week’s claims from Luis Suarez muddy the water even further
Following up from my previous piece on Luis Suarez, this saga has now been expanded and moved into a different arena following the striker’s claim that he had a verbal agreement with the club that they would let him go at the end of last season if they did not reach the Champions League. This issue has now become wider than mere ambiguity in a contractual clause. If what Suarez has said is correct, and the club did make this promise to him, then this issue is likely to get worse before it gets better, for both parties.
There is now no argument that the contractual clause is ambiguous and that it may not have been what Luis Suarez wanted, or in fact thought he was getting, when he was actually signing his contract. The PFA have commented that the clause in the contract is not clear, so it appears that they have some empathy with the player, but the PFA have also stated that ultimately it is a matter for the club and player to sort out – so no help there. The clause itself will come down to interpretation: what was intended and what was meant at the time it was drafted.
However, this issue with the contract may be undermined if the club did make a promise to Luis Suarez, which they are now reneging on. If such a promise was made, and Luis Suarez relied upon it and fully expected to be allowed to leave this season, then this could be an actionable contract in itself.
Verbal contracts of this nature are actionable, and despite Brendan Rodgers’ assertions to the contrary – i.e. that there was no such promise made, Suarez is adamant that this was the club’s position. The context of such a promise, if indeed there was one, will have to be taken into account. If it was a throwaway comment, made after training by the gaffer, then it will hold as much water as a sieve, as the manager has no authority to bind the club in such matters. However, if this was a promise made during contractual discussions, with members of the club’s board, then it may well be actionable and Suarez can sue on it.
Brendan Rodgers spoke yesterday about the “Liverpool way” and how Suarez is going against the grain and history of the club in the way that he is acting. This may be the case, but that does not excuse or detract from the fact that Liverpool have not only got an unhappy player, but could also have a very high profile, hefty and potentially groundbreaking legal case on their hands, which may not end favourably for them.
