It is due to the publication of information related to alleged irregular maneuvers carried out by the NGO whose visible face is the captain of the National Team and Barcelona.
The Leo Messi Foundation, whose visible face is the captain of the Argentine soccer team, obtained a favorable ruling in a lawsuit it had initiated against the Spanish newspaper ABC; against his former director, Bieito Rubido; and against journalist Javier Chicote for the publication of information related to alleged irregular maneuvers carried out by the foundation.
The Court of First Instance N ° 8 of Gavà ordered that the newspaper, Rubido (who in September left the management of ABC and was replaced by Julián Quirós) and Chicote pay 7,142.10 euros to the Leo Messi Foundation, in addition to the derived costs of the lawsuit, for moral damages caused to the Rosario soccer player. The amount will be allocated to the Sant Joan de Déu Hospital in Barcelona.
In his sentence, Judge Rubén Vallejo González considered that the information published by the newspaper and linked to an alleged tax fraud through the manipulation of accounts of the foundation headed by Jorge Messi, the athlete’s father, was not “true or true.”
The magistrate considered that the newspaper had published “headlines, entries and expressions that, based on previous judicial processes, suggest to the reader the possible commission of a new tax fraud by the Foundation that bears the actor’s name.”
This is not the first legal dispute between the Barcelona footballer and the centennial Madrid newspaper. In September 2018, the Court of First Instance No. 4 of Gavà had dismissed a lawsuit filed by Messi in June 2017 for violation of the right to honor against the same actors who this time were convicted.
On that occasion, the Court made a “complete dismissal” of the claim (the claim was for 202,786 euros) and ordered the player to pay the costs of the trial. On that occasion, Judge Patricia Batlle Ferrando had highlighted the “professional diligence” with which ABC had worked and the prevalence of freedom of the press over the right to honor.