fanzword

Mohamed Salah Misses Court Hearing in Egypt Ahead of Trabzonspor Match

Mohamed Salah was absent from a court hearing he was scheduled to attend in person on Sunday morning before the New Cairo First Instance Court, coinciding with his preparations to feature for Trabzonspor in the Turkish Süper Lig.

Get live scores & FPL updates
Download the Fanzword app

The legal dispute involves a civil lawsuit regarding fees for legal and administrative services, as well as consultations, which a lawyer claims to have provided to Salah.

The suit, registered under Case No. 7826 of 2025 (Full Civil), was filed by attorney Amr Faragallah Moursi Abdel Tawab. The plaintiff is seeking undisclosed financial dues alongside a compensation claim of 255,000 Egyptian pounds for what he described as material and moral damages.

The plaintiff relied on a power of attorney issued by Salah on July 20, 2012, stating it remained valid until the lawyer withdrew from representing him in August 2025. The dispute centers on the nature of the services rendered and the corresponding financial compensation owed.

The 14th Full Civil Circuit had requested Salah’s personal attendance to take a “Decisive Oath”—a formal legal procedure intended to refute the lawyer’s claims regarding unpaid administrative and legal work.

The oath is significant as a legal mechanism to settle disputed claims under Article 124 of the Egyptian Evidence Law. Failure to attend without a valid excuse can result in being deemed as having refused the oath; however, absence alone does not guarantee a default ruling until the court examines the legitimacy of the excuse and notification procedures.

Rather than attending the hearing in Cairo, the “Egyptian King” remains available for Trabzonspor’s Süper Lig fixture against Gençlerbirliği on Sunday evening, having been named in the expected lineup ahead of the 20:00 Cairo time kickoff.

The two matters proceed on separate tracks: Salah remains eligible to play for Trabzonspor pending further developments, while the court will subsequently evaluate the legal consequences of his absence to determine if a valid excuse exists or if refusal rules apply.