A week's time was granted by the Tar of the Lazio to the Covisoc for "to display" - that is to say deliver - the copy of the note of the Federal Prosecutor's Office containing i "interpretative clarifications" on the story of capital gains which concerned the Juventus.
Juventus case: TAR approves "secret" letter
The decision is contained in two sentences of the administrative judges filed omitted in their specific terms yesterday evening. The matter in question follows the referral made by the federal prosecutor's office of Figs for alleged offences pursuant to articles 31, paragraphs 1 and 4, of the Code of Sports Justice.
These are the articles referring to the "violations in management and economic matters" of the companies. The disciplinary proceedings in question followed a note with which the Co.Vi.So.C. has submitted a report regarding the assessment of the effects of the transfer of footballers on the financial statements of some professional clubs for the purposes of registration in the respective championships.
So, a request for defensive access and generalised civic access was proposed for the purpose of releasing a copy of the note from the Federal Prosecutor's Office, found by the Covisoc in the sense that the request could not be fulfilled as it had to be addressed to Federal Prosecutor's Office.
The note from the Lazio Regional Administrative Court on the capital gains case
Now the Tar, after a long technical ruling on the debated issue, held that, in light of the proposed access request, the Covisoc "it essentially proceeded by abandoning its jurisdiction over the exhibition, justifying it on the basis of the circumstance that the document for which access was requested was drawn up by the Federal Prosecutor's Office".
In the opinion of the panel, however, this is a decisive fact. "The lack of specific rules to protect access in the sports system is a crucial factor."; is "in the absence of specific provisions on defensive access in matters of sports regulation, the appeal in question "is undoubtedly admissible"" the interest of the appellants being evident.
From all this it follows that "Co.Vi.So.C.'s denial of jurisdiction to display the requested document, which constitutes the substance of the denial contested here, is illegitimate."
Appeals accepted, therefore with the judges who decided that "Co.Vi.So.C. is ordered to provide the appellant with a copy of the Federal Prosecutor's Office's note within seven days of the administrative communication of this ruling or of its notification, if earlier."
EDITORIAL TEAM
Choose the social channel you want to subscribe to