The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on 4 October 2024 that several FIFA transfer rules applying when a player terminates a contract without just cause are contrary to EU law. In Case C-650/22, the Court held that the rules impede the free movement of professional footballers and restrict competition between clubs, according to the Court's press release.
Court of Justice Rules Some FIFA Transfer Rules Are Contrary to EU Law
By The Corporate INTL Newsroom · 7 October 2024
The case was brought before the Belgian courts by a former professional footballer residing in France, who argued that the rules in FIFA's Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players prevented him from being employed by a Belgian club. The Cour d'appel de Mons referred questions to the Court of Justice.
The rules in question
Under the rules, where a club considers that a player has ended his contract without just cause, the player and any new club are jointly and severally liable for compensation owed to the former club. The new club may also face a sporting sanction banning it from registering new players for a period. In addition, the former club's national association must refuse to issue an International Transfer Certificate while the dispute is pending.
What the Court decided
On free movement, the Court found that the rules impose considerable legal risks, unforeseeable and potentially very high financial risks and major sporting risks on players and clubs, which together impede international transfers. Ensuring the regularity of interclub competitions by maintaining some stability in squads may justify restrictions, but the rules appear, subject to verification by the Belgian court, to go beyond what is necessary.
On competition law, the Court held that the rules have as their object the restriction, and even prevention, of cross-border competition between clubs recruiting players who are under contract or whose contracts are alleged to have been terminated without just cause. It compared such rules to a no-poach agreement and observed that, subject to verification, they do not appear indispensable or necessary.
What happens next
The case returns to the Cour d'appel de Mons, which must decide the dispute in line with the judgment. The ruling is binding on other national courts facing similar questions, and governing bodies, clubs and player representatives will need to consider its effect on contract stability rules.
Sources
Looking for legal or business advice?
Tell us what you need and the Corporate INTL team will help you find the right lawyer or adviser from our members in 150+ jurisdictions.