The case involves a dispute between Juventus Football Club S.p.A. and Envigado Football Club S.A., mediated by FIFA and later adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict stemmed from a 2015 loan agreement for player Andrés Felipe Tello Muñoz, which included an option for a definitive transfer. Juventus exercised this option, agreeing to pay Envigado a transfer fee of EUR 1,400,000 in installments. However, Juventus failed to meet the payment deadlines, prompting Envigado to file a claim with FIFA in January 2017. FIFA’s Players’ Status Committee ruled in favor of Envigado in March 2018, ordering Juventus to pay the overdue amount plus interest, along with a CHF 30,000 fine and procedural costs.
Juventus appealed to CAS, arguing it was unaware of FIFA’s proceedings due to an IT issue that filtered FIFA’s emails into an unwanted folder. The CAS panel, composed of three arbitrators, reviewed the case under Article R57 of the CAS Code, which allows for a reassessment of facts and law. While the panel acknowledged FIFA’s authority to impose sanctions under Article 12bis of its Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, it also considered mitigating factors, including Juventus’s lack of awareness of the proceedings. The panel upheld FIFA’s decision but reduced the fine to CHF 20,000, deeming this amount proportionate.
During the CAS proceedings, Juventus and Envigado reached a settlement agreement, resolving the contractual dispute but leaving the fine issue unresolved. The settlement required Juventus to pay EUR 1,460,000 to Envigado by a specified date, covering all legal costs. The panel ratified this agreement, incorporating it into the final award. The case highlighted the complexities of financial disputes in football transfers, emphasizing the importance of timely payments and adherence to contractual obligations. It also underscored the role of procedural fairness in disciplinary actions, balancing regulatory enforcement with consideration of mitigating circumstances.
The final ruling partially upheld Juventus’s appeal, amending the FIFA decision to reflect the reduced fine. The panel dismissed all other claims, reinforcing the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept) and the need for clubs to fulfill financial commitments promptly. The case serves as a reminder of the consequences of failing to meet financial obligations in international football transfers and the role of arbitration in resolving such disputes. The decision also clarified the scope of FIFA’s disciplinary authority and the conditions under which sanctions for overdue payments can be imposed.