Dansk Boldspil-Union (DBU), FC Nordsjaelland A/S, Batuhan Zidan Sertdemir v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

At a glance

Parties

Dansk Boldspil-Union (DBU), FC Nordsjælland A/S and Batuhan Zidan Sertdemir v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

Case no.

CAS 2023/A/9501

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal procedure (Articles R47 et seq., CAS Code 2023 edition)

Treaty

None. Appeal under Article 57(1) FIFA Statutes; FIFA RSTP (October 2022), Annexe 3, and Swiss law apply

Tribunal

Anna Bordiugova (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Football; transfer of a minor player; FIFA TMS

Outcome

Appeal dismissed. FIFA's refusal of 3 March 2023 to grant an exemption from the TMS validation exception was confirmed (operative part 15 May 2023; reasoned award 5 September 2023).

Amount

Transfer fee of EUR 1,550,000 net agreed between FCN and Bayer Leverkusen. The appellants sought GBP 20,000 towards their legal fees, which was not granted. The costs paragraphs of the operative part are not published.

The dispute

On 30 January 2023 FC Nordsjælland (FCN) agreed to buy the Danish player Batuhan Zidan Sertdemir from Bayer 04 Leverkusen. The player was then 17 years old. On 31 January 2023, the last day of the Danish registration period, FCN entered a transfer instruction in FIFA's Transfer Matching System (TMS), and the Danish association (DBU) applied to FIFA for approval of the transfer of a minor. On DBU's advice, FCN did not confirm the instruction until 7 February 2023. By then the player had turned 18 and the minor application had been cancelled automatically. FIFA refused DBU's request for a special exemption from the TMS "validation exception" because Article 10(7) of Annexe 3 to the RSTP requires the instruction to be confirmed before the registration period ends. The appellants argued that FIFA had not properly communicated Circular Letter 1763 of 1 July 2021, which revoked the 2017 procedure; that the rules were unclear and the circular was not binding; that the refusal was excessive formalism and caused irreparable harm; and that cancelling the minor application amounted to tacit confirmation.

Key holdings

1. FIFA's letter of 3 March 2023 is an appealable decision because it produced legal effects on the appellants. The appeal was filed in time and is admissible. FIFA did not object to the club's and the player's standing, and Article 57 of the FIFA Statutes does not limit who may appeal, so standing did not need to be decided. ¶¶ 49–52, 59
2. FIFA duly notified Circular Letter 1763. It sent it to DBU's general email address, published it on its website and uploaded it to the TMS Help Center Document Library. DBU was negligent in not forwarding it internally. Both DBU and FCN had 19 months, and a separate duty under Article 6(2)(h) of Annexe 3, to become familiar with it. ¶¶ 77–93
3. Circular letters are not mandatory and cannot override the RSTP. But Articles 7(d), 10(7) and 10(8) of Annexe 3 (August 2021 and October 2022 editions) themselves require the transfer instruction to be confirmed before the registration period ends, whether the player is an adult or a minor. Without confirmation the instruction never reaches FIFA, and no ITC can be requested. ¶¶ 94–105
4. The September 2020 Guide to submitting a Minor Application is only a non-binding guideline. It does not address confirming a transfer instruction, so it does not help the appellants. ¶¶ 107–110
5. Article 14 of Annexe 3 does not provide for an exception where a club fails to confirm a transfer instruction. The negligence of the association and the club cannot count as an exceptional circumstance, so FIFA was right to refuse the exemption. ¶¶ 113–119
6. No excessive formalism. Confirmation is a condition for the validity of the transfer request, not a box-ticking formality, and a seven-day delay is not a minor formal error. ¶¶ 122–129
7. No irreparable harm was proved. The club led its league without the player. The player is employed, can train and play friendly matches, and played for Denmark's U-19 team. The failure can be cured only in the next registration period. ¶¶ 130–138, 145

Procedural history

1. 1 July 2021FIFA issues Circular Letter 1763, which revokes the procedure for minors set out in Circular 1587 of 13 June 2017.
2. 31 January 2023FCN and the player sign an employment contract. FCN enters the transfer instruction in TMS but does not confirm it; DBU submits the minor application.
3. 7 February 2023FCN confirms the transfer instruction, after the player turned 18 on 4 February and the minor application was cancelled on 5 February.
4. 16–17 February 2023DBU requests the ITC and a special exemption from the validation exception; FIFA refuses.
5. 3 March 2023Decision of the Chairperson of the FIFA Players' Status Chamber confirming the refusal (the Appealed Decision).
6. 16 March 2023Joint Statement of Appeal filed with CAS. FIFA objects to an expedited procedure, and CAS does not apply one (23 March 2023).
7. 28 April 2023FIFA files its Answer; the Sole Arbitrator is appointed. On 4 May 2023 the Sole Arbitrator decides to proceed without a hearing.
8. 15 May 2023Operative part of the award: appeal dismissed.
9. 5 September 2023Reasoned award issued.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Anna Bordiugova Sole arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• FIFA RSTP Annexe 3
• Transfer Matching System
• TMS
• transfer of minors
• validation exception
• International Transfer Certificate
• registration period
• Circular Letter 1763
• Circular Letter 1587
• transfer instruction confirmation
• excessive formalism
• irreparable harm
• standing to sue
• hierarchy of norms
• duty of curiosity
• Bayer Leverkusen
• football transfer
• CAS appeal

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.