The lawyer Jean-Louis Dupont it was the front man of the legal pool he defended Jean-Marc Bosman in the three lawsuits brought by the Belgian federation, RFC Liège and UEFA against the former RFC Liège midfielder, which led to the famous ruling of the European Court of Justice that, the December 15, 1995shocked the world of football. Originally from Liège60 years old, Dupont has represented and defended federations in his career, club Of very first level (Real Madrid, Barcellona, PSG, Juventus, Milan, Porto, PSV Eindhoven, Liverpool, Marsiglia, Lione, Galatasaray, Fenerbahce), players (Mexes, Sergio Conceicao, Mutu, Witsel, Fellaini), coaches (Mourinho), managers (Antonio Giraudo) and even the Super alloy european.
Lawyer Dupont, the balance of football thirty years after the Bosman law?
The ruling presented two very distinct aspects: the freedom of the players upon expiry of the contract and the elimination of the “nationality clauses”. It is this second chapter that has changed football the most. If I remember correctly, a few years later, Arsenal, led by Arsène Wenger, played a match without any English players on the pitch and without any English players on the bench. Football was no longer the same. But the effects of the Bosman ruling are often overestimated. What really changed the economics of football was the combination of the Bosman ruling with the explosion in the value of TV rights.
During the days of that legal battle, did you realize the effects of a possible success in court?
The day after the sentence, the international press finally took an interest in the case. And, reading the newspapers, I had confirmation of what I had felt before the ruling of the Court of Justice: the Bosman ruling symbolized the obligation for international and national federations to submit to the public order of the EU.
What were the strong arguments that allowed you to win in court?
We argued that the rules of the international and national federations, which imposed nationality clauses and did not release players whose contracts expired, violated, on the one hand, the right to free movement of workers and, on the other, free competition. Advocate General Lenz of the European Court of Justice followed us all the way. The EU Council of Notaries itself limited itself to agreeing with us on the free movement of workers.
Did the sports institutions underestimate your legal action?
Without a doubt. They lived so much in their own world that they could not imagine how a sentence, issued by a Court established in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, could affect them. This attitude surprised us because we thought that, sooner or later, our adversaries would try to find an amicable solution to avoid a sentence.
What were the reactions of the football authorities to your success in court?
I believe they were paralyzed with amazement and therefore unable to react quickly. Only in 2001 did FIFA, under pressure from the European Commission, adopt a regulation, far from perfect, but which, at the very least, globalized the players’ freedom at the end of their contract. A ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU therefore led to a liberalization of the labor market worldwide.
How has football managed the effects of the Bosman law?
The market has adapted to the new legal reality. Unfortunately, little by little, FIFA, supported by the Court of Arbitration for Sport, has reduced its rules, excessively limiting the freedom of players. All this led to the Diarra case.
The former Real Madrid and PSG midfielder, now 40 years old, decided to leave Lokomotiv Moscow in 2014 after the first of the four years established by the contract and for this reason he was forced to sit out one season, with the addition of paying compensation of ten million euros. Diarra, assisted by the Dupont-Hissel firm, has initiated legal action against FIFA and the Belgian federation. The Court of Justice has ruled that FIFA rules on player transfers and those concerning the termination of contracts hinder the free movement of workers and limit competition between clubs, but the matter is not yet over
Could the legal issue linked to Lassana Diarra represent a new earthquake for football?
I believe that the Diarra ruling will have an even more significant impact than the Bosman ruling on the governance of sport in general and football in particular. Indeed, following the Diarra ruling, it is clear that the only way to regulate the sports labor market in the territory of the European Union will be to conclude EU collective agreements between unions representing sportspeople and international associations representing leagues and clubs. The mechanism is underway: last December 1st, FIFPRO Europe, which brings together thirty-six national unions of professional players, and European Leagues, with the support of UEFA and under the auspices of the European Commission, in the context of the “European social dialogue”, published a first joint resolution, outlining the main lines of the reform of the “transfer market”. It is a small historic step and it is interesting to see how UEFA has decided to modernize its governance by supporting collective agreements. All signatories of the resolution invite FIFA to participate in good faith and actively in this process. We’ll see if that’s the case. And in the past, the European Court of Justice, with the Diarra ruling, opened the way to compensation for all players and former players. All this led to the recent “Justice for Players” Class Action, already supported by around ten national professional players’ unions.
