Tribunal clears Varandas for calling Pinto da Costa a "crook" | OneFootball

Tribunal clears Varandas for calling Pinto da Costa a "crook" | OneFootball

In partnership with

Yahoo sports
Icon: Portal dos Dragões

Portal dos Dragões

·28 January 2026

Tribunal clears Varandas for calling Pinto da Costa a "crook"

Article image:Tribunal clears Varandas for calling Pinto da Costa a "crook"

The president of Sporting, Frederico Varandas, was acquitted by the Porto Court of Appeal in the case brought by the former leader of FC Porto, Jorge Nuno Pinto da Costa, whom the Sporting director called a "bandit".

Last year, he was initially sentenced to pay a fine of 7,200 euros (40 euros for 180 days) for the crime in question, as well as five thousand euros in non-material damages to the family of the deceased president of the dragons. Now, justice has sided with him, and the known decision is final, not subject to appeal.


OneFootball Videos


In the ruling accessed by Portal dos Dragões, the court stated: "The expressions used by the defendant, although unpleasant, were made in the duly detailed context of a sports confrontation between the two Presidents, and while not commendable or even endorsable, they are still considered to be covered by the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression and the right to express opinions and criticize."

The decision's grounds further state: "The expressions in question do not contain any offensive judgment of the honor or consideration of the assistant, and there is also no sufficient evidence that the defendant's intention was to insult the assistant or harm his good name and reputation, but only to respond to the assistant within the scope of the criticisms that the assistant made against him," concluding:

"Even if this were not understood, we could not fail to understand that the expressions used are part of a context of exchanges of provocations and accusations between the two Football club Presidents, with the Assistant being the one who initiated hostilities, making it clear that in this context the intervention of criminal law is excessive and unnecessary, which would always remove the unlawfulness of the defendant's conduct."

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇵🇹 here.

View publisher imprint