My understanding is he was released to play in Japan for 18 months ... meaning the Japanese side pay his wages .. and from Jan 1 he was to return to the CC on his contract...
The issue is he parted ways with his club in Japan early... so what to do after he left ... you assume his agent obtained an early release fee...
Given he was no longer under contract with the Japanese club he was unattached from when he left the Japanese club untill 1 Jan...
During his time in Japan the Mariners changed owners ... the issue is does / do the contracts with the older club remain in place with the new club... that's what's being argued I guess...
Sometimes like a spider on a mirror its worth asking the question from the other side ... assume in Japan he was badly injured and could never play again ... would the Mariners have had to pay out his contract from Jan 1 ... if yes then as I see it the Mariners contract is valid and enforceable ... however I am no lawyer and given the time they are taking it must be complex ...
In a normal course of events, Wee Mac would have had his loan cancelled by the Japanese club and he would have come back to play for CCM. But a) the club doesn't want him back until Jan 1st for some reason and b) the license has been transferred to a new owner whilst he was away.
If cap issues are the reason for A it is easy enough to fix, with a flick of the pen he can become your international marquee. Is Charlesworth that broke he can't afford to do that? If its a case of your club not willing to pay him until then, that is a breach of contract and he is entitled to leave.
B is much more murky but if CCM didn't think it was an issue, why did they get the players to come in and sign things to recognise the new ownership? Wee Mac didn't sign one of these.
Either way, the issue is how your club is being run atm. I know it hurts to have the illusion that your club is infallible broken but it seems they have screwed up and are now trying to dig in and save face.