The case involves a dispute between Mersin Idman Yurdu Club and FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on 25 April 2014. The conflict stemmed from the club's failure to comply with a FIFA decision dated 15 August 2012, which ordered the club to pay outstanding transfer fees of EUR 300,000 plus interest to Dutch club NAC Breda, along with CHF 15,000 in procedural costs to FIFA. Despite repeated reminders and warnings, the club did not meet these obligations, prompting FIFA to initiate disciplinary proceedings. The club had previously attempted to appeal the original FIFA decision, but its appeal was dismissed due to late filing.
The CAS panel, led by Sole Arbitrator Prof. Petros Mavroidis, examined the validity and proportionality of FIFA's disciplinary sanctions. The panel emphasized that once a decision becomes final and binding, it cannot be revisited unless new facts or evidence justify a revision. Since the club presented no such grounds, the CAS focused solely on reviewing the disciplinary measures. The panel upheld FIFA's enforcement mechanisms, noting their consistency with Swiss law and validation by the Swiss Federal Tribunal.
The club argued that financial difficulties excused its non-payment, but the CAS rejected this, stating that lack of funds or bankruptcy risk does not absolve contractual obligations. The factual background revealed that the club had agreed to pay NAC Breda EUR 450,000 for a player transfer but defaulted on installments. FIFA's initial decision in August 2012 ordered payment of the outstanding amount, but the club neither complied nor successfully appealed. FIFA then opened disciplinary proceedings, warning of sanctions such as fines, point deductions, or relegation. Despite repeated warnings, the club failed to pay or respond, leading to a disciplinary decision in July 2013 imposing a CHF 20,000 fine and a 30-day grace period, with further non-compliance risking a six-point deduction and potential relegation.
The club appealed to the CAS, seeking annulment of FIFA's decision and relief from payment obligations, arguing financial hardship and misinterpretation of facts. FIFA maintained that its decision was justified, citing the club's repeated non-compliance and significant debt. The CAS found the appeal admissible but dismissed it on merits, confirming FIFA's disciplinary actions as valid and proportionate. The ruling underscored the binding nature of FIFA's decisions and limited grounds for challenging them once final. It also reinforced that clubs must fulfill financial obligations regardless of economic circumstances, upholding FIFA's authority to enforce compliance through disciplinary measures.
The CAS concluded that FIFA's sanctions were lawful and proportionate, dismissing the club's appeal and affirming the CHF 20,000 fine. The decision highlights the enforceability of FIFA's financial and disciplinary rulings, ensuring the integrity of football's regulatory framework. All other requests for relief were dismissed, reinforcing the principle that financial difficulties do not justify non-compliance with contractual obligations.