The document details a complex legal dispute between UEFA and FC Sion/Olympique des Alpes SA (OLA) regarding player eligibility in the 2011/2012 UEFA Europa League (UEL). The case originated from OLA's hiring of a goalkeeper, E., from Al-Ahly Sporting Club in 2008 while the player was still under contract, leading to a breach of contract claim by Al-Ahly. FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) ruled against OLA in 2009, imposing a compensation fee and a two-registration-period ban on new player signings. OLA's appeals to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and the Swiss Federal Tribunal were dismissed, leaving the FIFA DRC decision final. Despite the ban, OLA attempted to register new players in 2011, which the Swiss Football League (SFL) rejected. OLA obtained provisional measures from a Swiss district court allowing the players to participate, but UEFA, not being a party to those proceedings, later declared the players ineligible after protests from Celtic during UEL matches.
The legal proceedings involved multiple layers, including challenges to CAS's jurisdiction and impartiality, with OLA contesting the independence of arbitrators and requesting extensive evidentiary submissions. The CAS panel, composed of arbitrators Hans Nater, Patrick Lafranchi, and Jean Gay, upheld UEFA's authority to review player eligibility and enforce its regulations. The panel affirmed that UEFA's actions were justified under Swiss competition law, as its regulations aimed to ensure fair competition and were applied uniformly. The panel dismissed OLA's claims of abuse of dominance, noting that UEFA's sanctions were proportionate and based on legitimate sporting reasons.
Key legal principles addressed included the validity of arbitration agreements by reference under Swiss law, the need for concrete legal interest to obtain declaratory relief, and UEFA's right to verify player eligibility upon protest rather than preemptively. The panel also clarified that provisional measures from national courts could be lifted by the authority deciding the merits, in this case, CAS. The final award, issued on 31 January 2012, upheld UEFA's decision to exclude OLA from the UEL and declared the players ineligible, dismissing OLA's requests for reintegration and compensation. The panel emphasized the importance of uniform rules in sports governance and the legitimacy of UEFA's enforcement mechanisms.
The case highlights the tensions between sports governance and national legal systems, with OLA attempting to challenge UEFA's authority through Swiss courts while UEFA sought to uphold its disciplinary decisions via CAS. The proceedings underscored the procedural complexities and jurisdictional challenges in resolving disputes between football clubs and governing bodies. The CAS award reinforced the principle that clubs must comply with international football regulations, even when conflicting rulings emerge from national courts. The decision ultimately upheld the integrity of UEFA's regulatory framework and its role in maintaining fair competition.