FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
On Friday morning, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on the incompatibility of certain provisions of FIFA's "Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players" (RSTP) with Community law.
The decision in question relates to a dispute between former French footballer Lassana Diarra and one of his old clubs, Lokomotiv Moscow, and could represent a turning point in the management of cases of termination of contracts "without cause" by professional footballers.
But what will be the consequences?
The answer comes directly from the Dupont-Hissel studio, run by Jean-Louis Dupont and Martin Hissel. Dupont is the famous lawyer of the "Bosman" decision and the one who supported the Super League against the European Union, which in this case assisted the protagonist of the dispute: former midfielder Lassana Diarra. The firm also answers directly to FIFA, which played down the decision.
FIFA has naturally tried to downplay the significance of this decision, arguing that it would be enough to modify two paragraphs of its regulations and that it would be up to the Court of Appeal of Mons to decide whether its regulations are illegal. or not. read the FIFA law firm's press release –.
This is completely false. The ECJ condemned, in very clear and harsh terms, the provisions at the heart of the transfer system created and managed by FIFA. Stripped of its heart, the system is dead. The CJEU issued a final decision (ie with absolute value and erga omnes res judicata) on the fundamental principles.
Therefore, in practice, the Court of Appeal of Mons will have to apply these declarations of illegality only in the concrete case of Mr. Diarra and, in particular, assess the damages that FIFA and the Belgian Football Federation will have to compensate ".
But the main question that everyone asks themselves, and that football protagonists like clubs and players think about, is this: and now, what will happen? The Dupont-Hissel studio also tries to answer this question in its press release.
" The decision of the ECJ is written in terms that pave the way for modern and truly democratic governance: the termination of the collective agreements between FIFPRO/FIFPRO Europe and the representative organizations of the clubs - we read -. The European Leagues welcomed the decision in the Diarra case and called for a reorganization of the regulation, especially through the negotiation of collective agreements.
There is therefore no reason to fear a regulatory vacuum: there is no doubt that players and clubs are able to develop mechanisms that protect their legitimate interests much better than the old FIFA system ."
Then there is the issue of compensation for footballers injured by a regulation, that of FIFA, which was condemned by the Court of the EU: " All players are entitled to this compensation, all over the world and even more in the EU, as they have all been subject to these illegal FIFA rules since their introduction in 2001. ”
" FIFA's wrongdoing has been proven and the principle that all players have suffered injuries has been established. The only remaining debate concerns the amount of compensation. FIFPRO Europe and FIFPRO have indicated that they will take the necessary measures to obtain compensation for the damages suffered by all players. This type of action for damages is commonly called a "class action" or "class action." The Dupont-Hissel firm will support the implementation of such actions by legitimate entities acting for this purpose ," the statement concludes.
Lini një Përgjigje