Evangelos Marinakis has taken his dispute with Crystal Palace from the stands to the High Court. Lawyers for the Nottingham Forest owner filed a defamation claim on Monday, almost a year to the day since Palace supporters unfurled a banner at Selhurst Park.

The banner depicted Marinakis holding a gun to the head of Forest captain Morgan Gibbs-White. CPFC Limited is one of two defendants named in the case, alongside “Persons Unknown”, a designation covering the supporters who created and displayed the banner.

Why Evangelos Marinakis Is Taking Crystal Palace to Court

The banner was displayed by supporters in the Lower Holmesdale End during the sides’ 1-1 Premier League draw at Selhurst Park on 24 August 2025. It showed Marinakis pointing a gun at Forest captain Morgan Gibbs-White and included the line:

“Mr Marinakis is not involved in blackmail, match-fixing, drug trafficking or corruption.” The wording referred to allegations that Marinakis has consistently denied.

Gibbs-White's name came up because Tottenham appeared close to signing him that summer after believing it had activated a £60 million release clause in his Forest contract. The move then collapsed, and Gibbs-White signed a new three-year deal to remain at Nottingham Forest.

He later discussed the decision in an interview alongside Marinakis, making their connection in the transfer saga clear to Palace supporters.

Marinakis waited nearly twelve months before filing. His lawyers issued the claim just before the usual one-year limitation period for defamation actions expired. That may reflect the time needed to assess the case and identify defendants.

The filing itself does not establish why the legal team waited until then.

Why Unnamed Crystal Palace Fans Are Also Facing Legal Action

Crystal Palace as a club isn't the only target. Marinakis is also suing Persons Unknown, a formal High Court designation that allows a claimant to proceed against people who cannot yet be individually identified.

In this case, that refers to the people who made and unfurled the banner. If Marinakis’ lawyers later identify the supporters who made or displayed the banner.

If Marinakis’ lawyers later identify the supporters who made or displayed the banner, potentially through CCTV, club records, or other disclosure, they could ask the court to amend the proceedings and name those individuals as defendants.

That would allow the action to extend beyond CPFC Limited. However, it would not happen automatically and would remain subject to the court’s procedural rules, service requirements and any limitation issues.

This is not the first sanction to follow the display either. The FA charged Palace with misconduct in November, alleging the club failed to stop supporters behaving offensively and provocatively that day, and fined the club £50,000 four months later.

The FA pointed specifically to Palace's own smuggling-prevention policy as evidence that the club was aware of the risk of banners like this being brought into the ground.