Reports surfaced recently that former Benfica coach Jorge Jesus had initiated legal proceedings against his previous employer. This news might conjure images of bitter disputes and courtroom drama, a staple of football`s off-field theatre. However, according to Jesus` legal counsel, the reality is considerably more mundane and technical.
Jorge Jesus` lawyer, Luís Miguel Henrique, has stepped forward to clarify the situation, asserting that despite the filing, there is “no conflict whatsoever” between the coach and Sport Lisboa e Benfica. The action, lodged with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAD), is described not as a hostile move, but as a necessary procedural step.
The core of the matter appears to be a tax adjustment issue. The Portuguese Tax Authority reportedly made a correction regarding Jesus` income tax. Under the terms of his contract with Benfica, the club was allegedly responsible for this specific amount. While Benfica was the contractual debtor, Jesus, as the individual, was the fiscal debtor and paid the corrected amount directly to the Tax Authority.
The legal action filed with the TAD is, therefore, related to Jesus seeking reimbursement from Benfica for the tax sum he paid. The lawyer explained that the filing was made “purely for caution” specifically because of the statute of limitations – the legal deadline by which such a claim must be formally made to preserve the right to recover the funds. Missing this deadline would mean forfeiting the claim entirely.
“There is no problem at all, there is no contentious conflict,” Luís Miguel Henrique is quoted as saying, emphasizing the technical nature of the action. He further added that discussions between Jorge Jesus and Benfica are ongoing and that a “principle of understanding” has been reached. The formal legal process, while existing, is merely a safety measure to protect Jesus` position regarding the financial detail.
In essence, what might look like a confrontation on paper is, according to the legal team, simply the official mechanism being engaged to resolve a specific financial item arising from a past contract, amidst ongoing and amicable dialogue. It serves as a reminder that sometimes, even in the high-stakes world of football, legal actions can be less about animosity and more about adhering to administrative timelines.
