The case involves a dispute between Delfino Pescara 1936 (Pescara), Royal Standard Liège (Standard Liège), and FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict arose from Pescara's failure to pay Standard Liège overdue transfer fees for a player, leading to sanctions imposed by FIFA under Article 12bis of its Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). The CAS panel, led by Sole Arbitrator Mark Hovell, conducted a de novo review, re-examining all facts and legal issues to rectify any procedural flaws from prior decisions. The central issue was the application of Article 12bis RSTP, which governs overdue payables and allows FIFA to assess cases after 1 April 2015, regardless of when the debt originated. The panel clarified that the date the payable became overdue is irrelevant for classification but may influence sanctions.
Pescara had initially agreed to pay Standard Liège €900,000 for the player, with payments structured in installments. Due to financial difficulties, Pescara restructured the first payment but later defaulted, leaving €720,000 unpaid. Despite selling the player for a profit, Pescara failed to settle the debt, prompting Standard Liège to file a claim with FIFA. FIFA ruled in favor of Standard Liège, ordering Pescara to pay €675,000 (after solidarity deductions) plus 10% annual interest, along with a CHF 50,000 fine and CHF 25,000 in procedural costs. Pescara appealed to CAS, arguing violations of its right to be heard, retroactive application of Article 12bis, and disproportionate sanctions.
The CAS panel dismissed Pescara's claims, emphasizing that FIFA’s correspondence had adequately warned Pescara of potential sanctions. The panel upheld the application of Article 12bis, noting that the regulation’s enforcement date (1 April 2015) was the relevant factor, not the debt’s origin. The panel also found the sanctions reasonable, given Pescara’s failure to pay despite engaging in other transfer activities. The CHF 50,000 fine, while the highest in absolute terms among similar cases, was the lowest as a percentage of the overdue amount. The procedural costs were deemed justified, as FIFA’s grounded decision warranted them.
The panel rejected Pescara’s argument that its right to be heard was violated during CAS proceedings, noting that the de novo review remedied any prior procedural flaws. Pescara’s refusal to sign the Order of Procedure was deemed inconsequential, as the panel ensured all parties had ample opportunity to present their cases. The panel also highlighted the impracticality of holding a hearing due to disproportionate costs relative to the dispute’s value.
Ultimately, the CAS panel upheld FIFA’s decision, rejecting Pescara’s appeal in its entirety. The ruling underscored the importance of financial accountability in football transfers and reinforced FIFA’s regulatory framework to prevent clubs from gaining unfair advantages. The case serves as a reminder of the consequences of failing to meet contractual obligations in professional football. The decision is final and binding, concluding the matter with no further recourse.