Nottingham Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis has launched a defamation claim in the High Court against Crystal Palace and unnamed individuals over a banner displayed by Palace supporters at Selhurst Park last season.
- Evangelos Marinakis has begun High Court defamation proceedings against Crystal Palace and unnamed individuals over a banner displayed at Selhurst Park.
- The banner showed Marinakis pointing a gun at Morgan Gibbs‑White and included allegations Marinakis denies.
- The FA previously fined Crystal Palace £50,000 over supporter behaviour at the same fixture.
- The case will examine whether a club can be held liable for defamatory banners displayed by fans inside a stadium.
What happened
The legal claim relates to a banner unfurled during Crystal Palace’s 1-1 Premier League draw with Nottingham Forest in August. Photographs and press reports show the image depicted Marinakis pointing a gun at Forest midfielder Morgan Gibbs‑White and carried the text: “Mr Marinakis is not involved in blackmail, match‑fixing, drug trafficking or corruption.”
Who is named in the claim and what’s been done already
Marinakis’ lawyers lodged the defamation action in the High Court on Monday, naming CPFC Limited — the company that operates Crystal Palace — and “persons unknown” among the defendants, according to reports.
The Football Association previously charged Palace in November 2025 over supporters’ behaviour at that fixture and fined the club £50,000 in February after finding the club had failed to ensure its spectators did not behave in an improper, offensive, abusive or provocative way. FA documents noted Palace had policies to prevent banners being smuggled into the stadium, a point that featured in the regulator’s ruling.
Context: the on‑field feud and related background
The banner was displayed amid an off‑field dispute between the clubs last season. Palace lost their place in the Europa League after being judged by UEFA to have breached multi‑club ownership rules; Nottingham Forest subsequently took Palace’s place in that competition. The two clubs exchanged public complaints and tensions have persisted into the current season.
The banner also referenced a high‑profile transfer saga involving Morgan Gibbs‑White, who was close to a move to Tottenham in summer 2025 before signing a new contract at Forest. Multiple reports say the banner’s imagery and text drew a direct line between those events and allegations levelled publicly against Marinakis — allegations he has consistently denied.
Why the case matters
- Legal precedent: Defamation claims against clubs for fan material are relatively rare and the case will test how liability is apportioned between clubs and individuals in stadium‑displayed messaging.
- Reputation and governance: Marinakis has denied the specific allegations mentioned on the banner; pursuing a civil claim shifts the dispute into the courts rather than football regulators.
- Supporter conduct: The FA’s earlier fine shows governing bodies can sanction clubs for the behaviour of their fans even when specific banners are not singled out in charging documents.
What the parties have said
Reports state Marinakis’ lawyers lodged the High Court claim on Monday. Media outlets covering the story say Palace and Forest were approached for comment; those reports do not include a public statement from either club at the time of publication. The BBC and other outlets note Marinakis has repeatedly denied the allegations cited on the banner.
Legal hurdles and likely next steps
Media coverage referencing legal commentary notes a claimant in a defamation case must establish that the published material conveyed a defamatory meaning and that publication caused serious harm. The claimant also needs to show the defendant was liable for the publication. How the court will treat a banner shown inside a stadium — and whether the club can be held responsible for supporters’ unauthorised material — will be central to the claim.
Procedurally, the High Court filing begins a civil process that can include requests for evidence disclosure, witness statements and, if unresolved, a trial. Defendants typically have time to file a response and may pursue defences including denial of liability or defences available under defamation law; reporting does not indicate how Crystal Palace plans to respond publicly or legally.
Timeline of the key events (as reported)
- Summer 2025: Morgan Gibbs‑White’s proposed move to Tottenham collapses; he later signs a new contract with Nottingham Forest.
- August 2025: Banner showing Marinakis pointing a gun at Gibbs‑White displayed at Selhurst Park during a 1‑1 draw.
- November 2025: FA charges Crystal Palace over supporters’ behaviour at the match.
- February 2026: FA fines Crystal Palace £50,000 for failing to ensure supporters did not behave improperly at that fixture.
- 10 August 2026: Reports confirm Marinakis has lodged a defamation claim in the High Court naming CPFC Limited and persons unknown.
Practical implications for fans and fixtures
The case reinforces clubs’ responsibilities under FA rules to manage stadium messages and the risks of supporter displays that target individuals. For fans, it underlines that provocative banners can prompt regulatory sanctions and civil litigation. On the pitch, the matter forms part of an ongoing rivalry between the clubs and adds an additional off‑field element ahead of their next scheduled meeting at Selhurst Park in October, as reported by some outlets.
What to watch next
Look for formal responses from Crystal Palace and Nottingham Forest, any court documents filed in reply and whether the FA or other football authorities comment further. The High Court timetable and any immediate case management directions will determine how quickly the dispute progresses toward disclosure or a hearing.
“Mr Marinakis is not involved in blackmail, match‑fixing, drug trafficking or corruption.”