FC Barcelona win the battle against 'Le Monde' and doping allegations

The French daily Le Monde finally compensated with 15,000 euros to Barcelona by linking, together with Real Madrid, the doctor Eufemiano Fuentes, accused of doping practices in criminal proceedings initiated as a result of the so-called Operation Puerto. The Supreme Court's ruling confirms that issued in October 2009 by the Court of Barcelona, ​​condemning 'Le Monde' to compensate the Catalan club with the same amount, for what he considered a trespass on the right to honor.

Barcelona sued 'Le Monde' by the information published on 7 (digital editing) and 8 (in its print edition) December 2006 and the source is cited as "confidential documents" Eufemiano Fuentes's own to relate the two clubs with alleged doping practices of his players.

The demand was estimated by a court of first instance of Barcelona, ​​which condemned 'Le Monde' to pay 300,000 euros to Barcelona for trespassing on the right to honor the Catalan club and publish a correction in both digital and print edition. 'Le Monde' then appealed the ruling, arguing that the Spanish courts were not competent to try the case and that in his time in his diary published in an official denial of Barcelona.

The District Court answered in part the use of French header reducing the moral damages and 15,000 euros, to understand that in Spain, where the court has jurisdiction, had more media coverage and the denial of the club's own sources that the news Eufemiano "Le Monde".

Also limited the obligation to rectify the information to its online edition, assuming good as correction in the printed journal FC Barcelona's denial published in his day. The Supreme Court has now resolved the appeal, confirming in all respects the decision of the Provincial Court, including compensation of 15,000 euros. The ruling, which has become final, said he can not keep the prevalence of free information on the right to honor the appellant, not having exercised their freedom of information legitimately.

"Although there was a high public interest in the matter, the information published was not true, to have used inconsistent and contrasting data, with the sources and testing conducted by the journalist insufficient for publishing a story that severity and social significance implied discredit in consideration of the club, "he says.