The case involves a dispute between SS Lazio S.p.A. (Lazio), Club Atlético Vélez Sarsfield (Vélez), and FIFA regarding solidarity contributions for the transfer of a football player. The player was initially registered with Vélez from 1998 to 2007 before being transferred to Al Saad Sport Club in Qatar in 2007. In 2008, the player was loaned to Birmingham FC and later to Lazio. Vélez claimed a solidarity contribution for the loan, which Lazio paid. In 2009, the player terminated his contract with Al Saad by invoking a clause allowing early termination upon payment of €20 million, after which he signed with Lazio. Vélez sought a solidarity contribution for this definitive transfer, arguing it constituted a transfer under FIFA regulations. Lazio contested this, claiming the player joined as a free agent after unilateral contract termination.
FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber ruled in favor of Vélez, ordering Lazio to pay €726,936 (including interest) for both the loan and definitive transfer. Lazio appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing the transaction did not qualify as a transfer under FIFA’s solidarity mechanism. The CAS panel identified four key elements to determine a transfer: (i) the original club’s consent to early termination, (ii) the new club’s willingness to acquire the player, (iii) the player’s consent to move, and (iv) the transaction’s price or value. The panel found these elements satisfied, as Al Saad had contractually agreed to termination upon payment, Lazio willingly signed the player, and the €20 million compensation reflected the transfer’s value. The CAS emphasized that FIFA’s regulations are broadly drafted to prevent clubs from avoiding solidarity payments through formalistic schemes.
The CAS upheld FIFA’s decision, confirming the transaction qualified as a transfer under the solidarity mechanism. The ruling highlighted that the substance of the transaction, not its formal structure, determines solidarity payment obligations. The case clarifies that even when a player’s movement involves contractual termination rather than a traditional transfer, the economic reality and mutual consent can trigger solidarity obligations. The decision reinforces FIFA’s regulatory framework, ensuring clubs cannot circumvent solidarity payments by structuring transfers unconventionally.
Regarding the loan agreement, the panel adjusted the solidarity contribution calculation, determining Vélez was entitled to €85,440, with an outstanding balance of €11,997.23 after Lazio’s previous payments. Interest was recalculated to accrue from 10 February 2009, rather than the earlier date initially decided. For the definitive transfer, the panel confirmed the amount set by FIFA at €715,383 with 5% annual interest from 1 August 2009 until payment, bringing the total payable to €727,380.23. The panel distinguished this case from a prior CAS ruling (CAS 2010/A/2098), noting key differences, including Al Saad’s voluntary consent to the transfer in exchange for compensation.
The ruling underscores the importance of adhering to FIFA regulations and the principles governing player transfers and solidarity contributions, ensuring fair compensation for clubs involved in player development. The CAS dismissed all other requests from the parties, finalizing the decision in favor of Vélez.