The case involves an appeal by S.C. F.C. Universitatea Cluj S.A. (Cluj) against the Romanian Football Federation (RFF) and the Romanian Professional Football League (RPFL) regarding the denial of a license for participation in the 2013/2014 national championship due to the club's insolvency proceedings. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel, composed of arbitrators Patrick Lafranchi, Rui Botica Santos, and Daniel Visoiu, issued a ruling on 18 November 2013, with the operative part dated 5 July 2013. The central issue was whether a club undergoing insolvency could be denied a license based on overdue payables, considering the legal effects of insolvency under Romanian law.
The panel found that under Romanian Insolvency Law, the initiation of insolvency proceedings on 6 February 2013 deferred all of Cluj's debts, meaning they were no longer considered overdue under the National Club Licensing Regulations (NCLR). However, the panel emphasized that mere deferral of liabilities did not ensure financial stability during the licensing season. To address this, it ruled that a license could only be granted if a reorganization plan was approved by the syndic judge by 31 May of the licensing season's starting year. Cluj had filed for insolvency on 29 January 2013 due to financial difficulties, and its reorganization plan was approved by creditors on 22 April 2013 and confirmed by the syndic judge on 29 May 2013—after the initial licensing refusal but before the CAS deadline.
The RFF's Club Licensing Commission had rejected Cluj's application on 26 April 2013, citing overdue payables to football clubs, employees, and tax authorities. The Appeal Commission upheld this decision on 10 May 2013, arguing that insolvency proceedings did not negate overdue payables until a reorganization plan was approved. Cluj contended that its debts were legally deferred under insolvency law and referenced an RFF letter stating UEFA’s insolvency exclusion rule did not apply to Romanian national competitions. The CAS panel underscored the need to interpret the NCLR in harmony with insolvency law to maintain legal consistency.
Ultimately, the panel ruled in favor of Cluj, annulling the RFF's decision and ordering the issuance of the license, as the club's reorganization plan met the 31 May deadline. The decision balanced legal protections for insolvent entities with the need for financial stability in sports licensing, highlighting the interplay between national insolvency laws and football regulations. The CAS also dismissed Cluj's request for provisional measures, as the final award rendered them unnecessary. The ruling ensured Cluj's participation in Liga I while reinforcing the importance of financial viability and regulatory compliance.