The case revolves around a dispute between Wisla Kraków, a Polish football club, and Adam Rafal Kokoszka, a professional football player, along with FIFA and Empoli FC S.p.A. The central issue concerns the termination of Kokoszka's contract with Wisla Kraków and his subsequent provisional registration with Empoli FC. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was tasked with evaluating the validity of FIFA's provisional measures and addressing jurisdictional and procedural matters. The CAS confirmed that decisions by FIFA's Single Judge or Players’ Status Committee, including those on provisional International Transfer Certificates (ITCs), are appealable to the CAS. It also ruled that national football associations have standing to request provisional player registration due to their role in managing ITCs and ensuring regulatory compliance.
The dispute began when Kokoszka unilaterally terminated his contract with Wisla Kraków in May 2008, citing Article 17 of the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). Wisla Kraków contested the termination, claiming the contract remained valid, but Kokoszka joined Empoli FC. FIFA's Single Judge granted provisional registration to Empoli, arguing that Wisla Kraków seemed more focused on financial compensation than retaining the player. Wisla Kraków appealed to the CAS, which upheld the provisional registration, emphasizing the player's right to work and the club's failure to promptly challenge the termination.
The CAS also addressed procedural issues, including the admissibility of a counterclaim by Wisla Kraków for damages. It ruled that such claims should be handled in separate proceedings, not within the appeal over provisional measures. The tribunal underscored the need for clarity and efficiency in resolving disputes, ensuring each issue is addressed in the appropriate forum.
The case highlights the balance between contractual stability and player mobility under the RSTP. The CAS affirmed the provisional registration, recognizing the necessity of provisional measures to protect players' rights when clubs delay legal action. It also clarified procedural aspects, such as the standing of football associations in requesting provisional measures and the inadmissibility of counterclaims in appeals focused on provisional decisions.
Empoli FC filed a counterclaim seeking compensation for damages due to the delayed ITC issuance, but the CAS rejected it, citing lack of evidence and the appeal's narrow scope. The final decision dismissed Wisla Kraków's appeal and upheld FIFA's provisional measures, reinforcing the principles of fair process and timely legal action in football disputes. The ruling underscores the importance of provisional measures in safeguarding players' rights and the need for claimants to provide substantiated evidence in legal proceedings.