The case involves a dispute between FK Željezničar, a professional football club based in Sarajevo, and the Football Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FFBH) over the denial of a license for the club to participate in UEFA competitions for the 2019/2020 season. The FFBH refused the license due to the club’s non-compliance with financial regulations, specifically an outstanding debt of BAM 20,211.07 owed to former coach Slavko Petrović as of the critical deadline of 31 March 2019. The FFBH cited Article 49 of its Club Licensing Regulations, which mandates that clubs must have no unpaid liabilities to employees by the deadline. The club appealed the decision to the FFBH Second Instance Commission, which upheld the ruling, prompting FK Željezničar to take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The club argued that it had initiated the payment before the deadline but that a bank error delayed the transaction, resulting in the payment being processed on 4 April 2019. It also contested the FFBH’s consideration of third-party submissions from Petrović’s legal representative, claiming this violated procedural rules. The FFBH maintained that evidence of payment submitted after the deadline could not be considered, emphasizing strict adherence to licensing rules to ensure fairness among clubs. The CAS proceedings, conducted by a sole arbitrator, Jacopo Tognon, relied on written submissions as neither party requested a hearing.
The arbitrator ruled in favor of the FFBH, stating that the licensing regulations took precedence over general procedural rules allowing late evidence under the CAS Code. The decision underscored that exceptions would undermine the authority of domestic licensing bodies and create unequal treatment among clubs. The arbitrator also noted that the risk of payment errors or delays lies with the debtor, meaning the club was responsible for ensuring timely fulfillment of its financial obligations. Despite the club’s claims, evidence, including bank statements and payment orders, did not substantiate that the payment was made before the deadline. Discrepancies in the submitted documents further weakened the club’s case.
The CAS upheld the FFBH’s decision, reinforcing the importance of strict compliance with regulatory deadlines and the principle that clubs must manage financial risks effectively. The ruling also considered the impact on third parties, as Football Club Radnik Bijeljina had already replaced Željezničar in the competition. The case serves as a precedent emphasizing the binding nature of licensing criteria and the limited scope for procedural flexibility in such disputes. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and all other motions were rejected, confirming the FFBH’s denial of the license.