Nottingham Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis suing Crystal Palace over offensive banner that resulted in £50k fine

NOTTINGHAM Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis is suing Crystal Palace over a banner displayed at Selhurst Park last season. The controversial City Ground chief has taken to Palace to court after he was depicted holding a gun to Morgan Gibbs-White’s head. Evangelos Marinakis is suing Crystal Palace over an offensive banner Credit: Reuters That followed the breakdown of Gibbs-White’s planned move to Tottenham a year ago – with the Forest skipper signing a new deal instead. Marinakis’ lawyers lodged a defamation claim in the High Court today, with CPFC Limited listed as a defendant – as the year-long feud between the clubs rumbled on. Sign up for the Football newsletter Thank you! The banner was unfurled during the sides’ August meeting in South London. It also read: “Mr Marinakis is not involved in blackmail, match-fixing, drug trafficking or corruption.” Marinakis has consistently denied any wrongdoing in relation to such allegations. The FA charged Palace over the incident in November before handing them a £50,000 fine. But two clubs have clashed off the field over the past 12 months – after Forest had challenged Palace’s place in the Europa League due to UEFA’s multi-club ownership rules. As a result, Forest took Palace’s place in the Europa League, with the Eagles dropping to the Conference League which they won. Most read in Sport In another twist, Palace boss Oliver Glasner left the club and joined Forest this summer after being persuaded by Marinakis. Daniel P. Astaire, Managing Partner of leading London law firm Grosvenor Law said: “Mr Marinakis will need to demonstrate not only that there is a defamatory meaning – which appears at first glance straightforward given the image – but that the ‘publication’ caused him serious harm. “He will also need to show that Crystal Palace was liable for the publication. “These points will both be challenging to prove, which suggests that the claim may have been issued as a warning shot, perhaps with minimal intention to run this claim very far.” Comment now