the Guest this Friday on France Info, the lawyer of Carlos Ghosn, the Master Jean-Yves Le Borgne, has described the discovery of the payment of the rent of the Trianon, château de Versailles, the former boss of Renault via funds of the company, of “misunderstanding”. “We should remember that Carlos Ghosn is the head of an industrial empire. In all probability, he never saw any of the invoices. It is likely that there are employees, of the secretaries”, argued the lawyer, who insisted that “Renault, in this case, has disbursed no money”.
To master The Terminal, the businessman franco-lebanese was simply “considered to be free and this in fact is, but the is under the sponsorship without having been specified”. In other words, it would only be a “misunderstanding”, which could be “corrected billing,” which has not yet been made. Carlos Ghosn, according to him, is “ready to repay” the sum complained of, of the order of 50,000 euros.
” ALSO READ – The doubts of Renault on the marriage of Carlos Ghosn at the château of Versailles
The lawyer, therefore, believes that the former president of the auto alliance Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi Motors had simply not taken the time to look at this topic : “The great problem of these people on-busy to travel the world, and who govern both Nissan and Renault, is that the details of their private affairs so as to escape them”, he says. This statement comes in the wake of a warning from Bruno Le Maire, who declared that it wanted a “total transparency” is made on this issue : “the audit of Renault has started, it starts to give results,” said the boss of Bercy.
” ALSO READ – Case Carlos Ghosn: a look back on two months of twists and turns legal
As was revealed in Le Figaro , the French manufacturer has discovered that the rental of a portion of the field had been assigned to the contract of sponsorship is signed by the group. In a press release, Renault has therefore explained that he “decided to bring these facts to the attention of the judicial authorities”, to determine if it is an abuse of social good.
