The motives of the bianconero club can be summarized in 9 points:
• The appeal by the Federal Prosecutor should have been deemed inadmissible.
• Violation of the “thema decidendum”: the Court used the evidence from the criminal investigation to, in reality, build a new accusation.
• The Federal Court of Appeals has neglected the explanations offered by the defense of Juventus.
• Challenge of an offense not permitted under the Rules of Procedure.
• Failure to assess decisive elements.
• Procedural flaw with the delayed deposit by the Federal Prosecutor of the note on 14/04/2021.
• Disproportionality in the -15 sanction.
• Failure to refer to Art. 6 of the Code of Sports Justice.
• Failure to consider a mitigating circumstance: an omitted motive on the presence of the organization, management and control model of the club.
• The appeal by the Federal Prosecutor should have been deemed inadmissible.
• Violation of the “thema decidendum”: the Court used the evidence from the criminal investigation to, in reality, build a new accusation.
• The Federal Court of Appeals has neglected the explanations offered by the defense of Juventus.
• Challenge of an offense not permitted under the Rules of Procedure.
• Failure to assess decisive elements.
• Procedural flaw with the delayed deposit by the Federal Prosecutor of the note on 14/04/2021.
• Disproportionality in the -15 sanction.
• Failure to refer to Art. 6 of the Code of Sports Justice.
• Failure to consider a mitigating circumstance: an omitted motive on the presence of the organization, management and control model of the club.
