The case involves a dispute between fifteen Uruguayan football clubs (the appellants) and three football governing bodies—FIFA, CONMEBOL, and the Uruguayan Football Association (AUF)—regarding FIFA's intervention in AUF's governance. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a decision on 25 June 2019, addressing several legal issues, including jurisdiction, res judicata, standing, and the autonomy of sports associations under Swiss law. The dispute arose from FIFA's appointment of a normalization committee to oversee AUF's operations due to AUF's non-compliance with FIFA's statutory requirements. The CAS confirmed its jurisdiction to review decisions of FIFA's Bureau of the Council, as FIFA's statutes provided no alternative legal remedy. The panel clarified that the principle of res judicata did not apply, as there was no prior judicial decision involving the same parties, legal grounds, and subject matter.
The appellants challenged FIFA's intervention, arguing it was arbitrary, based on incorrect information, and violated AUF's autonomy. They sought to annul FIFA's decision and restore AUF's governance. FIFA and CONMEBOL defended the intervention, citing AUF's prolonged failure to align its statutes with FIFA's standards despite repeated warnings and deadline extensions since 2011. The panel emphasized FIFA's discretion under Swiss law to intervene in member associations under "exceptional circumstances," as outlined in Article 8 of FIFA's Statutes. It found FIFA's intervention justified, given AUF's non-compliance and the chaotic electoral process, which included ineligible candidates and procedural irregularities. The panel upheld FIFA's decision, noting it was proportionate and necessary to avoid AUF's suspension.
The CAS also addressed procedural matters, including the admissibility of the appeal and the standing of the parties. It ruled that the appellants had standing to sue, as the decision directly affected their membership rights, but CONMEBOL lacked standing to be sued, as it did not issue the contested decision. The panel rejected FIFA's attempt to submit late evidence, deeming it irrelevant. Ultimately, the CAS dismissed the appeal, affirming FIFA's authority to enforce compliance with its statutes and uphold governance standards in football associations. The decision reinforced the balance between association autonomy and regulatory oversight, underscoring CAS's role in resolving disputes within the football governance framework while respecting Swiss law and international sports jurisprudence. The ruling provided a legal framework for evaluating similar disputes, emphasizing the necessity of proportionate and justified interventions by governing bodies.