The case revolves around a dispute between Aris FC, a Greek football club, and FIFA concerning unpaid wages to a former Argentinean player. Aris FC sought FIFA's intervention after the Greek Sports Court ruled on the matter, arguing that a private agreement between the club and the player was overlooked. FIFA responded by stating its decision-making bodies lacked jurisdiction, as the case had already been adjudicated by the Greek court, and advised Aris FC to seek remedies through Greek authorities. Aris FC interpreted FIFA's refusal as a final decision and appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The central legal issue was whether FIFA's letters constituted a final decision subject to appeal. CAS ruled that FIFA's refusal, despite being framed as a letter, was effectively a decision because it definitively rejected Aris FC's request and directed the club to seek alternative remedies. CAS emphasized that FIFA's general secretariat lacked the authority to decide jurisdictional matters, which should have been handled by the Players' Status Committee (PSC) or the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC). The panel found that FIFA's correspondence clearly indicated no further recourse within FIFA, making it a final and appealable decision.
FIFA argued that CAS lacked jurisdiction, contending its letters were administrative and not formal decisions. However, CAS rejected this, asserting that any FIFA decision affecting a party's rights and presented as final is subject to appeal under FIFA's statutes and CAS rules. The panel concluded that FIFA's refusal to adjudicate the matter constituted a denial of justice, as it improperly delegated jurisdiction to national authorities without proper evaluation by the PSC or DRC. CAS affirmed its jurisdiction and ruled that FIFA's refusal was a final decision, allowing Aris FC's appeal to proceed. The case underscores the principle that administrative bodies must follow procedural rules when determining jurisdiction and that parties must have access to proper judicial review to prevent denial of justice.
The procedural framework and jurisdictional rules governing disputes within FIFA's regulatory system were also highlighted. FIFA's regulations, including the FIFA Statutes and the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players, establish clear procedures for handling disputes, particularly employment-related ones with an international dimension. These disputes are typically adjudicated by the PSC or DRC, with appeals to CAS within 21 days of notification. The document emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance, detailing how cases must be submitted through FIFA's general secretariat, which then directs them to the appropriate body. The PSC chairman resolves jurisdictional uncertainties, and the DRC and PSC must follow specific procedural guidelines, including time limits for adjudication.
In the Aris FC case, the Panel found that FIFA breached its procedural rules by not handling the club's request correctly and by rendering a decision through an improperly constituted body. The Panel underscored that FIFA's general secretariat lacks authority to decide jurisdictional issues and must forward claims to the relevant bodies. The decision highlighted the necessity for strict adherence to FIFA's internal procedural rules to ensure valid and fair dispute resolution. CAS annulled FIFA's decision and remitted the case back to FIFA with instructions for the DRC to issue a reasoned decision on its jurisdiction within a reasonable timeframe. The ruling emphasized adherence to procedural fairness and the proper application of FIFA's regulations, dismissing all other relief requests by the parties. The case demonstrates the critical role of CAS in reviewing FIFA's decisions to ensure compliance with established regulations and procedural fairness.