The case involves Robert Regvar, a Croatian professional football player, who appealed a disciplinary decision by FIFA to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The dispute stemmed from a 2003 contract between Regvar and NK Zrinjski Mostar, where Regvar claimed unpaid salaries and sought release, while the club alleged he left without consent and owed them money, including a signing-on fee and a car. In August 2006, FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) ruled against Regvar, ordering him to pay BAM 34,000 and return the car, with a four-month playing ban for non-compliance. Regvar appealed this decision to CAS in May 2007, challenging the FIFA Disciplinary Committee's enforcement of the DRC ruling.
The CAS panel, composed of arbitrators from the Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland, clarified its limited scope of review under Article R57 of the CAS Code, which restricted it to the disciplinary decision rather than revisiting the finalized DRC ruling. FIFA argued that the Disciplinary Committee's role was solely to enforce the DRC decision, not reassess its merits. The panel agreed, emphasizing FIFA's disciplinary mechanisms under Article 71 of its Disciplinary Code, which ensure global enforcement of decisions, a principle supported by Swiss law. Regvar's appeal focused on alleged factual errors, but the CAS found these arguments misdirected, as they pertained to the DRC ruling rather than the disciplinary process.
The hearing occurred in October 2007, and the award, issued on December 5, 2007, dismissed Regvar's appeal, upholding the disciplinary sanctions. The panel noted that Regvar had failed to timely appeal the DRC decision, as he only became aware of it in April 2007 and missed the 21-day deadline. Consequently, the DRC decision was final, limiting the appeal to the disciplinary measures. The panel upheld the CHF 5,000 fine, deeming it proportionate under FIFA's regulations. It also rejected Regvar's claims about poor representation by his agent, stating this did not excuse non-compliance.
The ruling underscored the importance of procedural deadlines in sports arbitration and the enforceability of FIFA's decisions globally. By dismissing the appeal, CAS reinforced the finality of FIFA's disciplinary framework and the limited grounds for challenging finalized rulings. The case highlights the necessity for players and clubs to adhere to contractual and procedural obligations within FIFA's regulatory system.