The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) addressed a case involving Le Mans FC and FIFA, with Olympique Bamako seeking to intervene in the proceedings. The dispute originated from a FIFA Disciplinary Committee decision on October 13, 2011, which sanctioned Le Mans FC for failing to comply with a prior CAS award from May 6, 2010. The award required Le Mans FC to pay Olympique Bamako €480,000 in training compensation for a player. Olympique Bamako argued it had a legitimate interest in intervening, as it was the party that initiated the disciplinary action and was the creditor of the unpaid compensation. It claimed the disciplinary decision affected its rights and that the suspension of proceedings due to Le Mans FC’s appeal caused harm. However, both FIFA and Le Mans FC opposed the intervention. FIFA contended that disciplinary procedures are unilateral and likened the case to an enforcement proceeding under Swiss law, where Olympique Bamako had no standing. Le Mans FC argued the intervention request was filed late and that Olympique Bamako lacked a legitimate interest in contesting the sanctions.
The CAS panel referenced Article R41.4 of its Code, which states that only the arbitral tribunal, once constituted, can decide on intervention requests, with the Chamber President’s preliminary decision not binding. The panel noted that CAS jurisprudence consistently holds that in disciplinary matters, only the federation or sports body that issued the contested decision (in this case, FIFA) can be a party unless the appellant raises claims against a third party, which Le Mans FC did not do. The panel rejected Olympique Bamako’s intervention, emphasizing that disciplinary procedures are unilateral and that Olympique Bamako’s role as a creditor did not grant it party status in the appeal. The decision reinforced the principle that disciplinary appeals are confined to the accused and the issuing authority, barring third-party involvement unless exceptional circumstances apply.
Further details revealed that Olympique Bamako’s intervention request was submitted outside the 10-day deadline stipulated by Article R41.3 of the CAS Code. The club had been aware of the arbitration proceedings since February 6, 2012, but its request was only made clear on April 2, 2012—well beyond the deadline. Even if an earlier letter from February 20, 2012, were considered a request, it would still be late. The CAS advisor informed Olympique Bamako on April 4, 2012, that Le Mans FC opposed its intervention, and by April 10, 2012, the President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division had rejected the request, citing the missed deadline and the unilateral nature of FIFA’s disciplinary procedures.
The arbitral tribunal upheld this decision, noting that Olympique Bamako’s request was inadmissible due to the missed deadline and its lack of standing in the disciplinary proceedings. The tribunal reiterated that only the sports federation or body that issued the contested decision can be a party to CAS proceedings, unless the appellant raises claims against a third party. Since Le Mans FC had designated FIFA as the sole respondent and made no claims against Olympique Bamako, the tribunal dismissed the intervention request definitively, concluding the matter in accordance with Article R48 of the CAS Code. The ruling underscored the strict adherence to procedural deadlines and the limited role of third parties in disciplinary appeals.