The case involves an appeal by Cruzeiro Esporte Clube against disciplinary sanctions imposed by FIFA for failing to comply with a prior Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) award. The dispute originated from a 2017 decision by FIFA’s Players Status Committee (PSC), which ordered Cruzeiro to pay €850,000 plus interest to Al-Wahda FC. Cruzeiro appealed to CAS, resulting in a partial modification but overall confirmation of the PSC’s ruling. When Cruzeiro failed to pay, FIFA initiated disciplinary proceedings, imposing a fine and warning of a six-point deduction if payment was not made within 90 days. Cruzeiro appealed this decision to CAS, which upheld FIFA’s sanctions. After continued non-compliance, FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee (FDC) issued a final 30-day deadline for payment in August 2020, threatening automatic relegation to a lower division if the debt remained unpaid.
Cruzeiro challenged the sanctions, arguing that the 2019 FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC) should apply instead of the 2017 FDC, as it provided milder penalties. The club also claimed the sanctions violated principles of proportionality, due process, and ne bis in idem (no double punishment for the same offense). Cruzeiro cited financial difficulties exacerbated by Brazil’s economic crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted revenue streams. The club submitted witness statements detailing efforts to negotiate with creditors and manage debts under new leadership, attributing non-payment to previous mismanagement.
The Sole Arbitrator rejected Cruzeiro’s arguments, ruling that the 2017 FDC was correctly applied since the breach occurred while it was in force. The arbitrator emphasized that FIFA’s escalating sanctions—fines, point deductions, and potential relegation—were lawful and proportionate, given Cruzeiro’s persistent non-compliance over three years. The decision highlighted that FIFA’s disciplinary system, upheld by CAS and the Swiss Federal Tribunal, prioritizes enforcing financial obligations to maintain the integrity of football governance. The arbitrator dismissed claims of due process violations, noting Cruzeiro had ample opportunity to comply and failed to propose a viable repayment plan.
The ruling reinforced FIFA’s authority to impose disciplinary measures and underscored the importance of adhering to binding decisions. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the FDC’s decision and confirming the sanctions unless Cruzeiro paid the debt within 30 days. The case illustrates the strict enforcement of financial obligations in football and the consequences of non-compliance, even in exceptional circumstances like financial crises. The decision serves as a precedent for the legitimacy of escalating sanctions to ensure respect for contractual and regulatory obligations in sports governance.