PAMedia/dpa
London
The world players’ union has disagreed with interim changes to transfer rules introduced by FIFA in the wake of the landmark Lassana Diarra judgement.
Diarra, a former Arsenal, Chelsea and Portsmouth midfielder, had sued FIFA for damages in the Belgian courts, citing two of its rules for the collapse of a move to Belgian club Charleroi after the termination of his contract with Russian side Lokomotiv Moscow in 2014.
The European Court of Justice (CJEU) ruled in October that some of the transfer rules imposed by football’s global governing body were contrary to EU law because they restricted freedom of movement and were anti-competitive.
Following the CJEU ruling, FIFA opened a “global dialogue” on Article 17 of its transfer rules, which governs the consequences of a player breaking contract without just cause, and on Monday published interim amendments to the rules which come into effect in time for the January transfer window.
However, global players’ union FIFPRO is against the interim measures. “Following Lassana Diarra’s successful challenge against the legality of Article 17 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), FIFPRO informed FIFA of the conditions under which it could negotiate the amendments to the regulations to reflect the ruling,” a union statement said.
“Until now, we have been unable to reach a consensus. We do not agree with the temporary measures announced by FIFA which have been introduced without a proper collective bargaining process.
“The measures do not provide legal certainty to professional footballers and do not reflect the judgement by the European Court of Justice.” FIFA’s interim framework provides a definition of “just cause” within the rules, while also removing some of the specific criteria to be used in the calculation of damages owed by a player or coach for a breach of contract which were deemed unlawful by the CJEU.
Compensation shall instead be calculated in an “objective and transparent way” and at a level required to reimburse the party that has suffered as a result of the breach.
Also, a new club will only be held jointly liable for a breach of contract where the claiming club can prove that the new club induced the breach.
Similarly, the interim rules on sporting sanctions remove the presumption that a club signing a player who has terminated a prior contract without just cause is guilty of inducing the breach.
Instead, the claiming club must prove that the new club induced the player.
The rules introduce a “duty to collaborate” on all parties, obliging them on the one hand to only request evidence that is relevant and likely to exist, and to disclose such information where it is requested. A tribunal may draw an “adverse inference” where relevant information is not disclosed.
The rules have also been updated on the issuing of international transfer certificates (ITCs).
