The case revolves around FC Aris Thessaloniki's appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) against FIFA, alleging a denial of justice due to FIFA's failure to enforce disciplinary decisions against Panionios N.F.C. and the Hellenic Football Federation (HFF). The dispute originated from FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) decisions in November 2004, which ordered Panionios to pay players A. and B. €70,500 each within 30 days and imposed a ban on new player registrations. When Panionios failed to comply, the FIFA Disciplinary Committee issued further decisions in February 2005, imposing a €15,000 fine and granting a 30-day grace period for payment, with a warning of a six-point deduction if payment was not made. Although Panionios eventually paid the amounts after the grace period, the HFF did not deduct the points as ordered by FIFA.
FC Aris, which would have benefited from the points deduction as it could have prevented Panionios from remaining in the first division, argued that FIFA's inaction constituted a denial of justice. On June 3, 2005, FC Aris formally requested FIFA to enforce the decisions, initiate new disciplinary proceedings against Panionios, and sanction the HFF for distorting the championship. FIFA responded that enforcement was the HFF's responsibility and that disciplinary actions were at the discretion of the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.
FC Aris escalated the matter by appealing to CAS, challenging FIFA's refusal to intervene directly. CAS initially ruled it lacked jurisdiction over FIFA's letters of June 6 and 7, 2005, but later examined whether FIFA's inaction constituted a formal or substantive denial of justice. The panel clarified that a formal denial of justice occurs when a body fails to issue or communicate a decision after repeated requests, while a substantive denial of justice arises if a decision is arbitrary or violates legal principles. The panel noted that FIFA's regulations did not grant FC Aris a right to appeal the non-enforcement of decisions, making FIFA's inaction a final decision subject to CAS appeal.
FIFA subsequently issued decisions on June 20 and July 27, 2005, sanctioning the HFF for non-compliance with warnings and fines. FC Aris argued these sanctions were inadequate and constituted a substantive denial of justice. The CAS panel, however, found that FIFA had acted within its discretionary authority by formally requesting the HFF to comply and sanctioning it for non-compliance. While the sanctions were deemed lenient, the panel concluded they were not arbitrary or a serious breach of legal principles.
The case highlights the complexities of enforcing disciplinary decisions in international football governance, particularly when member associations fail to comply with FIFA's rulings. It underscores the balance between FIFA's discretionary powers and the need for accountability in enforcing its decisions. The panel ultimately dismissed FC Aris's claims, ruling that FIFA's actions did not amount to a denial of justice and reaffirming that national federations are responsible for enforcing FIFA's rulings, with FIFA's role limited to imposing sanctions for non-compliance. The decision emphasizes the limits of judicial review in sports governance and the importance of procedural safeguards in international sports disputes.