Benjamin Mendy has been awarded £11.5million in unpaid wages by Manchester City.
Mendy, 30, took the Premier League champions to an employment tribunal when his £500,000-a-month salary was halted in 2021 following his rape charge. The Frenchman stood trial twice, but he was cleared last year.
He has since resumed his football career with Ligue 2 side Lorient, and he claimed for "unauthorised deductions" from his wages. Mendy claimed for his unpaid wages plus bonuses written into his contract that included a £900,000 bonus for appearing in 60% of matches.
Mendy also claimed he was due a £1million bonus if City qualified for the Champions League plus an annual £1.2million payment to his image rights company.
City stopped Mendy's wages one month after he was charged in 2021 after City chiefs claimed Menday was not "not presently ready and able to perform” the obligations of his contract". He added Omar Berrada, then of City, said he would receive his unpaid wages once he had been cleared.
However, when Mendy messaged Berrada in November 2022 for confirmation, he received no response. Mendy also claimed he received no message back from City's chief executive Khaldoon Al Mubarak.
As a result, the former French international was forced to borrow money from team-mates - with the court hearing Riyad Mahrez, Bernardo Silva and Raheem Sterling helped the full-back out as he ran out of cash "very quickly".
Mendy was also forced to sell his Cheshire mansion to cover legal fees, bills and child support payments after his wages were withheld.
Sean Jones KC, representing City, told the tribunal Mendy only had himself to blame for his lack of cash for his "irresponsible" behaviour that included reports lockdown-busting parties at his mansion and breaking his bail conditions.
"The essence of the submission by Mr Mendy is that his contract creates a moral hazard," Mr Jones told the tribunal.
"He says 'I can behave as irresponsibly as I like, I can ignore all the rules, both legal, of the club and common sense to the point where my behaviour results in prison.' He is trying to make a moral hazard into a virtue.
“He says ‘It should in no way affect my entitlement to pay. There should be no consequences to my behaviour.'"
