The case involves a dispute between Sociedade Esportiva Palmeiras (Palmeiras) and FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), concerning the interpretation and application of Article 18bis of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). The dispute arose from a 2012 transfer agreement between Palmeiras and Liga Deportiva Universitaria (LDU) for the rights of a player, which included clauses allowing mutual influence over transfer decisions. FIFA found these clauses violated Article 18bis, which aims to prevent undue external influence on football clubs to maintain their independence and the integrity of the sport. The FIFA Disciplinary Committee imposed a fine of CHF 50,000 on Palmeiras, later reduced to CHF 25,000 by the FIFA Appeal Committee, along with a warning for future conduct.
The CAS panel upheld FIFA's interpretation of Article 18bis, emphasizing its broad applicability to prevent any form of undue influence, regardless of whether the influencing party was another football club or an external third party. The panel clarified that while contractual terms might be legally enforceable under civil law, they could still breach FIFA's regulations. The panel rejected Palmeiras' argument that LDU was not a third party under the 2010 edition of the regulations, noting that the 2015 amendment merely clarified the provision's scope rather than expanding it. The panel also dismissed Palmeiras' claims of procedural unfairness, including its request to access LDU's disciplinary file, as it was not a party to those proceedings.
Regarding sanctions, the CAS panel noted its limited power to review FIFA's disciplinary decisions, intervening only if the imposed fine was grossly disproportionate. In this case, the panel found the fine justified, as it aligned with FIFA's disciplinary practices and was not evidently excessive. The panel also rejected Palmeiras' mitigating arguments, such as economic hardship and lack of experience, emphasizing that the club, as a professional entity, should have been aware of FIFA regulations. The decision underscores the balance between contractual autonomy and regulatory compliance within FIFA's framework, ensuring the sport's integrity is preserved.
The ruling serves as a precedent for interpreting Article 18bis and highlights CAS's role in reviewing disciplinary measures while respecting FIFA's discretionary powers. The case reinforces the importance of maintaining club independence in transfer and employment matters, as mandated by FIFA regulations, and underscores the consequences of violating these rules, including financial penalties and reputational damage. The CAS ultimately dismissed Palmeiras' appeal, confirming the FIFA Appeal Committee's decision and ordering the club to bear all associated costs and legal expenses. The decision reaffirms the principle that clubs cannot exempt themselves from regulatory compliance through private agreements.