Legal defense of Persepolis in the Bifuma case The reason for not paying the amount agreed between Esteghlal Khuzestan and Persepolis is another part of Persepolis' defense. Officials at this club claim that after checking with the league organization, they were informed that Bipoma does not have a contract with Estaglal Khuzestan, therefore paying a fee for his departure is not relevant. The Persepolis players are referring to Estegalal Khuzestan's complaint file at the Football Association's Status Committee to prove this claim. Based on these defenses, the Esteghlal club from the province of Khuzestan previously demanded funds from Persepolis for the implementation of the agreement, but the status committee rejected this claim and announced that there is no contract between the player and the Khuzestan club and that the agreement on the separation is valid. The important point in Persepolis' legal argument is that the status committee's decision was final and no objection was made to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within the 21-day deadline. On the other hand, regarding the possibility of filing a lawsuit against Bipoma himself in the international authorities, this player's defense is based on the fact that the preparations for his separation agreement were made in cooperation with two clubs, but the investigating authority in Iranian football did not accept this issue. In this context, the legal argument raised is that due to the previous investigation by the local authority and the provision of a final decision in the dispute between the two clubs, the same issue should not be discussed again in the international authority. - Link.

Legal defense of Persepolis in the Bifuma case The reason for not paying the amount agreed between Esteghlal Khuzestan and Persepolis is another part of Persepolis' defense. Officials at this club claim that after checking with the league organization, they were informed that Bipoma does not have a contract with Estaglal Khuzestan, therefore paying a fee for his departure is not relevant. The Persepolis players are referring to Estegalal Khuzestan's complaint file at the Football Association's Status Committee to prove this claim. Based on these defenses, the Esteghlal club from the province of Khuzestan previously demanded funds from Persepolis for the implementation of the agreement, but the status committee rejected this claim and announced that there is no contract between the player and the Khuzestan club and that the agreement on the separation is valid. The important point in Persepolis' legal argument is that the status committee's decision was final and no objection was made to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within the 21-day deadline. On the other hand, regarding the possibility of filing a lawsuit against Bipoma himself in the international authorities, this player's defense is based on the fact that the preparations for his separation agreement were made in cooperation with two clubs, but the investigating authority in Iranian football did not accept this issue. In this context, the legal argument raised is that due to the previous investigation by the local authority and the provision of a final decision in the dispute between the two clubs, the same issue should not be discussed again in the international authority. - Link.