Tuesday , July 5 2022

Break News: Court throws Derek Boateng's suit against John Paintsil for loan cash


Ex-Ghana star, Derek Boateng, is against the former international team John Paintsil over a $ 20,000 loan left out, with the court order to the referee to pay legal fees and costs the defender

The Accra Court rejected Boateng's claims that Paintsil loaned the money in the camp during the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, making the claim uncommon.

According to the court presided by Jystifer Akua Tagoe, he thought that Boateng, former director of AIK Stockholm, was entitled to no merit.

Boateng demanded the recovery of the amount together with interest at a commercial bank rate of the date the defendant collected the money until the date of the final payment.

Former star Fulham and Getafe asked Paintsil to pay for her legal fees and cost following the alliance party that revealed deep hatred and anime between the two former friends.

Paintsil insisted he did not have to have the pitch of the international runner-up before.

"I have had a court and court over the matter and I told the matter with my solicitor to take the necessary legal action," he told Kasapa FM Sports.

"All I can say is that I do not have Derek.

"I do not owe him a penny, but as the matter is now in court, I will be less talk and let the judiciary decide whether or not I owe it."

According to the claim statement, the plaintiff said he was Ghana, a football player and respected his career internationally, and lived in London, while the defendant, John Paintsil, was also a football player and a live in Ghana after a successful international career.

He said the plaintiff, he (Boateng) and the defendant (Paintsil) were national team players of Ghana Black Stars and were part of Ghanaian support that played in the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.

Although the South African team, the defendant lended $ 20,000 from him (Boateng) and he (Paintsil) pledged to pay the money in the camp, but he then promised to pay when he returned to his club.

The plaintiff said further, because they played for the national team, who did not follow the defendant strongly for his money thinking because they were friends, the defendant would be willing to pay the money .

Source link