clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

DiLuca Case: Lpr Seeking Damages

Blood_mediumCall him il Killer di Billable Hours? Danilo DiLuca's legacy to cycling probably won't be his tarnished on-bike accomplishments, after what seems like a fairly straightforward doping case moves forward to his likely banishment. But according to La Gazzetta, Lpr Brakes is ginning up proceedings to seek damages from DiLuca to compensate for the harm he has done to the team. So maybe DiLuca will leave a legal legacy to the sport, at least. Here's the team statement, via Google Translations:

"Moreover, the athlete - it is stated in a note from the LPR - will be held responsible for all damages resulting image is like to sponsor the team for both the company reserves the right to instruct their lawyer to act through the courts to protect of its repute in order to determine the damage caused to the team, defending the interests of itself and recover all costs, penalties and fines that the sponsors and / or Rcs decides to ask the team. "

I have to wonder what exactly this amounts to, besides some scary sounding language. Cost recovery? Sure, to the extent Lpr has to pay penalties to the Giro. If Lpr has a contractual damages clause in its arrangement with the team, it's a little hard to tell whether DiLuca can be responsible for those Euros. That's probably (I have no actual idea) a deal between the cycling team (Bf Cycling Management) and the Lpr Brakes company, and/or Farnese Vini and others. Can DiLuca be sued for damages in a contract to which he wasn't a party? I wouldn't think so, unless his own deal with Bf Cycling Management extends to him that responsibility.

Then there's the amorphous "image damages." Lpr will say "you stained our reputation." DiLuca can counter that much of their reputation hinged on his success, since they weren't up to much otherwise. He could also challenge the idea that people really assumed they were completely above board anyway, and at least in the US system he might call some other riders to testify about their own activities. Lastly, my favorite defense (which he's probably too proud to raise) would be something along the lines of, 'hey, you hired me after my first doping suspension, do you really think you had a clean reputation?' Heh heh... hey, if they're looking to bankrupt the guy, he might give this last defense some serious thought.

Anyway, just doing some lawyerly thinking out loud...