The Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) questions the legality of certain FIFA rules on the transfer of professional players and considers that “they may be contrary to the free movement of workers” between Member States. The case analyzed by the jurist Maciej Szpunar, whose conclusions are not binding but are largely followed by the community magistrates in their rulings, is the litigation that began in August 2014 between Lassana Diarra and Lokomotiv Moscow.
The French player left Real Madrid in September 2012 and began his Russian adventure, first at Anzhi and then at Lokomotiv Moscow, which paid 12 million euros in August 2013. But the French midfielder’s stay ended abruptly when the The Moscow club terminated his contract due to an “alleged breach” in the summer of 2014, since the player did not accept a salary reduction. Then, a judicial war began, which Szpunar has now spoken about. In this case, according to legal sources, the criterion responds to what is contained in community regulations on labor matters.
After terminating the contract with the midfielder, Lokomotiv claimed compensation from the footballer at the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber. For his part, Diarra went to the same instance to request payment of back salaries. Furthermore, he considered that he was free and set out to find a new team. Here Belgian Charleroi appeared on the scene, interested in signing a French international practically for free.
But footballer and club came across FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RETJ), which govern all transfers in the world of football. This document contemplates that in the case of an abrupt breach of a contract, it must be the player and his new club that pay the compensation, if applicable, to the club of origin (in this case Lokomotiv). Furthermore, as long as the litigation persists, an international permit will not be issued so that the professional can play in another country.
A year stopped
Faced with this situation, Charleroi withdrew and Diarra was sentenced by the FIFA chamber to pay 10 million euros to the Russian entity. He paid and was able to continue his career at Olympique de Marseille after being unemployed for a year. The punishment was ratified by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in 2016.
Then, Diarra, represented by the lawyer of the ‘Bosman case’ Jean-Louis Dupont, went to ordinary justice. He sued FIFA (for its rules) and the Belgian Football Federation (for not issuing the transfer) for damages for not allowing him to play for Charleroi and six million euros in lost earnings. The Belgian court referred the issue to the CJEU. “There is no doubt that the RETJ has a restrictive nature with respect to free movement,” says Szpunar, who does not evaluate the Lokomotiv-Diarra conflict but rather the consequences of the rule.
“These provisions can discourage or dissuade clubs from hiring players due to the fear of having to assume an economic risk,” adds the Advocate General, who also emphasizes that the sporting sanctions that these entities can receive “can prevent a player from playing. his professional activity in a club in another Member State. And he emphasizes in his report: “By limiting the ability of clubs to hire players, the RETJ necessarily affects competition between clubs in the market for the acquisition of professionals.”
2024-05-01 04:57:36
#European #justice #threatens #eliminate #part #FIFA #rules #transfers
