The case CAS 2015/A/4027 revolves around a dispute between Udinese Calcio S.p.A. and the Austrian Football Association (ÖFB) concerning the provisional registration of a minor player with SC Neusiedl am See, an amateur club in Austria. The conflict arose when the Italian Football Federation (FIGC) rejected the issuance of an International Transfer Certificate (ITC) for the player, citing an existing employment contract with Udinese. FIFA’s Single Judge later authorized the provisional registration, prompting Udinese to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The core issues addressed were the standing to sue and be sued in ITC disputes, procedural aspects under FIFA regulations, and the application of Swiss law.
Udinese argued that it had standing to sue as it was directly affected by the decision, given its contractual relationship with the player and financial investments in his development. The club also contested the player’s claim of psychological issues, alleging these were fabricated to justify contract termination. The ÖFB, however, maintained that it was not the proper respondent, asserting that FIFA, as the decision-making body, should have been the target of the appeal. The ÖFB emphasized that FIFA’s regulations treat ITC issuance as an administrative procedure between national associations, excluding clubs from direct participation.
The CAS panel examined whether Udinese had standing to sue, referencing FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), which define ITC issuance as an inter-association matter. While CAS jurisprudence acknowledges that clubs with a legitimate interest may challenge decisions affecting them, the panel noted that Udinese was not formally involved in the FIFA proceedings and thus lacked standing. Additionally, the panel evaluated the standing to be sued, applying Swiss law (Article 75 of the Swiss Civil Code) subsidiarily, as FIFA’s regulations do not specify this aspect. The panel concluded that only FIFA, as the issuing authority, could be sued, not its member federations like the ÖFB.
The Sole Arbitrator dismissed Udinese’s appeal, ruling that the ÖFB lacked standing to be sued and that the proper respondent should have been FIFA. The decision highlighted the procedural intricacies of ITC disputes and the importance of correctly identifying the parties with standing. The case clarifies that while clubs may have legitimate interests in such matters, the procedural framework limits their direct involvement unless FIFA is the respondent. The CAS ultimately upheld the FIFA Single Judge’s decision, dismissing all other requests for relief and underscoring the administrative nature of ITC issuance and the jurisdictional boundaries between national associations and FIFA. The ruling emphasizes the need for procedural precision in football transfer disputes, particularly those involving minor players and contractual obligations.