Fifa attacked on the property rules of the players: decision in a month
The case between the small Belgian club Seraing to Fifa, which could undermine the rules of ownership of players and financial fair play, was pleaded Thursday in the court of Brussels, which could make its decision to 'here a month.
This case, which has all the appearance of a new Bosman case, primarily concerns the third property of players, currently prohibited by Fifa.
Other issues concern, by extension, the principle of financial fair play and even the legitimacy of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (the CAS, based in Switzerland).
Lawyers Seraing (Belgian D3) and Fifa (they were 18 in total!) Argued for two hours before the civil court of Brussels who put the case "in continuation" - that is to say that a next hearing is scheduled for next Thursday, but only for document filings - and could make its decision within four weeks.
The third party ownership (TPO), banned by the International Football Federation, is the possibility for investors outside a club to own one or more parts of the economic rights of a player. What purpose? Collect part of the value of a future transfer.
At present, only clubs have the right to property on a player.
At the origin of this case, we find the Belgian club Seraing, signatory of a third-party contract with the investment fund Doyen Sports in January 2015.
Seraing refused to comply with the TPO ban imposed four months later by Fifa and was then fined financially (150,000 euros fine) by the International Federation.
- Bosman bis? -
One of Seraing's lawyers is Jean-Louis Dupont, who was one of the advisers to Jean-Marc Bosman, whose eponymous stop liberalized the transfer market in 1995, introducing the free movement of players and abolishing sports quotas (on the basis of nationality).
According to Mr. Dupont, by banning the TPO and "under the guise of protecting ethical values, Fifa uses its regulatory power to promote its own economic interests and those of its ultimate members, the clubs, monopolizing for their sole benefit a transfer market that she decided to create and regulate ".
"Where is the ethic when the player can not own his own rights?" Wonders the lawyer who could therefore be at the origin of a judgment Bosman "bis", which would again upset the market of transfers.
In this case, the Belgian lawyer also questions the legitimacy and independence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), based in Lausanne, Switzerland, which had endorsed FIFA's sanction against FC Seraing.
As the CAS is financed by the sports federations (especially the FIFA), it can not be independent, say the defenders of FC Seraing who also consider that this court is based outside the European Union, it would not have legitimacy to rule on matters governed by Community law.
If justice were to allow the TPO, it would also undermine the principle of financial fair play. What interest some clubs, such as PSG, which are limited in their development.
Before a final verdict, the judicial process could last several months or even years, if, for example, the Belgian court decided to refer a preliminary question to the European Court of Justice.
AFP
