Following preliminary questions from the Belgian appellate court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on 4 October 2024 that certain provisions from FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (FIFA RSTP) constitute a violation of free movement of workers within the EU and EU competition law.
The case arose from a dispute between former French footballer Lassana Diarra and club Lokomotiv Moscow. The CJEU’s decision on this decision may have ramifications for the international football transfer system. This blog is meant to provide insight into the details of the case, the CJEU’s considerations for the ruling it delivered and what the decision could mean for professional players and clubs. While the case also dealt with EU competition law, this blog will focus on the freedom of movement of workers within the EU. Before we dive into these subjects, we will provide context about the football transfer system.
The international football transfer system before the Diarra case
Professional football has become a global marketplace, especially since the landmark Bosman case which prohibited domestic football leagues in EU Member States and UEFA from imposing quotas on foreign football players to the extent that they discriminated against EU citizens. Following this case, every summer and winter, enormous amounts of money change hands as top football clubs try to lure the best players to their respective stadiums. When a player changes clubs, he or she is reported to have made a transfer. Often, the payment of a transfer fee is required to secure the services of a certain football player. But what is a transfer and how has this system has been working?
Professional players sign contracts with clubs for a fixed term (typically of up to 5 years). If a player changes clubs before the contract expires, the new club pays a compensation to the old one. This is known as a transfer fee. After the transfer fee is agreed upon, the new club and the player will enter a contract.
Following Bosman, players in the EU are allowed to move to another club at the end of their contract without a transfer fee being paid. French superstar Kylian Mbappé has been one of the most notable players who changed employers on a Bosman transfer: he moved from Paris St. German to Spanish side Real Madrid in the summer of 2024.
Football transfers may bring about cross-border movements, for example when a German national living in Germany takes his or her talents to an Italian football club. In the event of such a transfer, an International Transfer Certificate is necessary. This is a certificate provided by the football association to which the player’s former club belongs and issued to the football association to which the player’s new club belongs.
What happened?
In the Diarra case, former French footballer Lassana Diarra signed a 4-year contract with Russian football club Lokomotiv Moscow in August 2013. In 2014, Lokomotiv Moscow brought a case against Diarra with the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) for allegedly termination his employment contract without just cause, claiming € 20 million as compensation.
The player disputed the claim, alleging that the club had not paid his wages in full. Diarra was ultimately ordered to pay € 10.5 million to Lokomotiv. However, pending the review of the claim, Diarra’s football career was put on hold. Belgian club, Royal Charleroi S.C wished to sign him, but were unwilling to do so owing to the effect of certain provisions of the FIFA RSTP.
Under the RSTP, a player who terminates their contract with a club without just cause must compensate the former club. The player's new club is jointly liable for this payment (Article 17(2) FIFA RSTP). If a player breaches their contract during the "protected period"—typically two to three years from the contract's start, depending on the player's age—the new club is presumed to have induced the breach. This may lead to sanctions, such as a registration ban for the new club (Article 17(4) FIFA RSTP). For international transfers between clubs under different national associations, an International Transfer Certificate (ITC) is required. However, this certificate cannot be obtained if a contractual dispute between the player and their former club is ongoing (Article 9 and Annex 3 FIFA RSTP)
Diarra deemed that these rules hindered his football career and constituted a violation of the right to free movement. As a French national he sought to work as a footballer in Belgium for Charleroi S.C.. He brought a claim against FIFA and the Belgian Football Association before the Belgian court, which was partially upheld. This led FIFA and the Belgian Football Association to appeal the decision. The Belgian appellate court decided to suspend the proceedings and asked the CJEU if Articles 45 and 101 TFEU permit joint and several liability for compensation owed by a player and their new club to the former club when the player terminates the contract without just cause. The Belgian appellate court wanted to know if Articles 45 and 101 TFEU also permit the withholding of the International Transfer Certificate by the former club's national football association in cases of a contractual dispute between the player and the former club.
The CJEU’s main points with respect to freedom of movement
Following its rulings in the SuperLeague case and the Royal Antwerp Football Club cases, the CJEU considered that rules adopted by sports federations generally fall within the scope of EU law, unless these rules were adopted for exclusively non-economic reasons and for matters of interest only for sport. The CJEU considered that the relevant rules for transfers constitute a restriction on the free movement of workers under Article 45 TFEU (para. 75-94). In this case, the CJEU particularly mentioned that the relevant rules of the RSTP generally and automatically prohibit the issuance of International Transfer Certificates necessary for a professional player to be registered with their new club, if there is a dispute between that player and his/her former club involving the termination of the contract between those parties. Charleroi S.C. made Diarra an offer of employment which was conditional on the assurance that it would be able to register and field him in Belgium. Diarra was unable to obtain such an assurance from FIFA since there was a dispute between him and Lokomotiv Moscow. Therefore, the CJEU concluded that the rules at issue restrict the freedom of movement of workers.
The CJEU considered that the freedom of movement can be restricted if such a restriction services a legitimate objective and if the principle of proportionality is respected. While the CJEU left it up to the Belgian Court to assess if the restrictions could be justified as proportionately pursuing a legitimate aim, the CJEU made several observations indicating that such arguments brought by FIFA would likely be unsuccessful (para. 95 – 113).
What does the Diarra case mean for players and clubs?
Whether or not Diarra will have a similar impact on the professional footballing world as Bosman did is uncertain. Both journalists and fans became alerted at the prospect of more regular transfers, induced by unilateral termination of employment contracts by professional football players. Concern has been raised that larger clubs may be feel empowered to negotiate with players and prompt a unilateral contract termination by the player with his/her former club, without the risks that the current RSTP bring about. On 25 November 2025, the FIFA Disciplinary committee announced in a letter directed to FIFA Secretary General Mattias Grafstrom that measures against players and clubs based on Article 17 RSTP are temporarily suspended. While FIFA acknowledged that the contested rules will be amended, it remains to be seen if Diarra will have a negative impact on smaller clubs, which generally have less (financial) leverage.
About the author Muhyadin Mohamud. Attorney-at-law at Everaert Advocaten. Muhyadin assists corporate and private clients with obtaining residence permits and visas for employment-related purposes and family reunification. In recent years, he specialized himself in advising on applications for residence and work on religious grounds. Muhyadin also advises clients on bringing foreign workers to the Netherlands for the construction of mega yachts. He can further inform you on the conditions for bringing top athletes to the Netherlands.
Yorumlar