Benjamin Mendy, the former Manchester City defender, is entitled to most of the £11 million in wages that were withheld during the period when he faced sexual offence charges, according to a ruling from an employment tribunal. The judgment comes after Mendy, who was acquitted of the charges, challenged the Premier League club’s decision to stop paying him from September 2021 until June 2023, the date when his contract expired.
Mendy, who was once the world’s most expensive defender when he signed for Manchester City in 2017, was arrested in November 2020 after a woman accused him of raping her following a meeting at a bar. This was followed by a second arrest in January 2021 when another woman accused him of sexual assault at a party at his home. These accusations led to several legal proceedings, with Mendy being suspended by Manchester City and placed on unpaid leave in August 2021 after being charged with multiple counts of rape and sexual assault.
In January 2023, after a retrial, Mendy was acquitted of six counts of rape and one count of sexual assault. However, his time away from the pitch was marked by a prolonged period of legal battles, including being remanded in custody twice. The period in question, from September 2021 until June 2023, during which Manchester City withheld his wages, was central to the tribunal’s case.
Judge Joanne Dunlop, who issued the ruling, determined that Mendy was entitled to be paid for most of the period during which his wages were withheld, as he was not in custody during those months. However, the judge specified that Mendy would not be entitled to recover wages for the times when he was imprisoned awaiting trial. These periods of custody were seen as a result of Mendy’s own actions, including breaching his bail conditions, which led to his being held in jail.
The tribunal’s ruling focused on the periods when Mendy was not in jail but was still unable to play for Manchester City. Specifically, this included the time when Mendy was on bail and subjected to an FA suspension, which was imposed without findings of misconduct. During these periods, the judge found that Mendy was “ready and willing” to fulfill his contract obligations, but he was prevented from doing so due to factors beyond his control. As a result, Mendy was entitled to recover the wages that Manchester City withheld during this time.
Judge Dunlop explained that employers are generally required to pay wages to employees even during suspensions, provided that the suspension is not a result of a sanction or punishment. Since Mendy’s suspension was a precautionary measure, not a penalty, and was caused by factors outside his control, the tribunal ruled that Manchester City was legally obliged to pay him the wages he claimed for the periods he was on bail.
The legal conflict surrounding Mendy’s case was not only about wages but also involved significant public and legal scrutiny. Mendy had always maintained his innocence, and his legal team argued that the charges against him had damaged his career and life. They contended that Manchester City, as his employer, abandoned him during his time of need. The club, on the other hand, maintained that Mendy had largely brought the situation upon himself, pointing to his behavior and the multiple warnings he had received regarding his actions.
The case highlighted a larger debate about the responsibilities of employers when their employees face serious criminal allegations. In Mendy’s case, the tribunal emphasized that the legal question at hand was whether Manchester City had the right to withhold wages under the terms of his contract, not whether he “deserved” to be paid. This distinction focused on the legal obligations of the club rather than the moral or ethical considerations surrounding Mendy’s conduct.
Ultimately, the tribunal sided with Mendy, ruling that the club could not withhold his wages for the periods when he was not incarcerated. The case serves as an important reminder of the complexities involved in employment law, especially when an employee’s personal legal issues intersect with their professional responsibilities. It also underscores the importance of understanding the difference between contractual obligations and the personal circumstances of those involved.
For Mendy, the ruling is a significant victory, especially after his acquittal, which marked the end of a turbulent chapter in his life. He now plays for Lorient in France’s Ligue 2, continuing his career after what has been a challenging and public legal battle. While the financial compensation represents a partial remedy for the months of lost earnings, the emotional and reputational toll of the legal proceedings will likely remain a part of his legacy.
