Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Al Merreikh Sport Club v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Al Merrikh Sports Club (Sudan) v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)
Case no.
CAS 2023/A/9611
Forum and rules
Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal procedure under the CAS Code (2023 edition)
Instrument
FIFA Statutes Article 57(1); FIFA Disciplinary Code (2019 edition)
Tribunal
Jacques Radoux (Sole Arbitrator)
Sector
Football; disciplinary enforcement of CAS awards
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (14 February 2024): the Club had no standing to appeal, and the Sudan Football Association should have been named as a respondent.

The dispute

Al Merrikh Sports Club, a club in Omdurman, Sudan, won three CAS appeals against the Sudan Football Association (SFA) on 10 June 2022 (CAS 2021/A/8371, 8413 and 8488). The appeals arose from disputes over who was the Club's legitimate president and executive board, and each award annulled the SFA decision under appeal. Between August and October 2022 the Club filed three complaints with the FIFA Disciplinary Committee. It alleged that the SFA had not complied with the awards and asked for sanctions under Article 15 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code. On 31 March 2023 the Secretariat, acting for the Chairperson, declined to act. It treated the matter as internal to the SFA and/or CAF and forwarded the complaints to them. The Club appealed to CAS. FIFA argued that the Club lacked standing to sue, that the appeal failed because the SFA was not named as a respondent, and that the awards, which only annulled decisions, contained nothing to enforce.

Key holdings

  1. The 2019 edition of the FIFA Disciplinary Code applies under the principle tempus regit actum, because all the complaints were filed before the 2023 edition entered into force. The relevant provisions did not change in substance. ¶¶ 67–69
  2. The Club was not, and would not have become, a party to the disciplinary proceedings. It based its complaints only on Article 15(1), not on Article 15(2) as a creditor under a financial decision. A complainant under Article 52(2) acquires no procedural rights and stays outside the procedure, like a whistleblower. ¶¶ 77–81
  3. The Club was not directly affected by the refusal to open proceedings. Opening proceedings would not automatically have led to a sanction, and any effect of a sanction on the SFA would at most have been indirect. The Club also showed no tangible financial or sporting interest: it never complained about the CHF 1'000 cost contributions awarded to it. It therefore lacked standing to appeal. ¶¶ 82–90
  4. An appellant who seeks to have disciplinary proceedings opened or a sanction imposed must name the party to be sanctioned as a respondent. The SFA was directly affected by the relief requested but was not named. FIFA alone lacked standing to be sued (passive mandatory litisconsortium), so the appeal also failed on this ground. ¶¶ 91–93
  5. CAS had jurisdiction under Article 57(1) of the FIFA Statutes. The appeal, filed within 21 days, was admissible. ¶¶ 55–63

Procedural history

  1. 10 June 2022CAS issues awards in CAS 2021/A/8371, 8413 and 8488 in the Club's favour against the SFA.
  2. 5 August, 26 September and 4 October 2022The Club files three complaints with the FIFA Disciplinary Committee about the SFA's alleged non-compliance with the awards.
  3. 31 March 2023The Secretariat, acting for the Chairperson of the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, declines to act on the complaints.
  4. 18 April 2023The Club files its Statement of Appeal with CAS.
  5. 5 September 2023FIFA files its Answer, and CAS confirms Jacques Radoux as Sole Arbitrator.
  6. 21 September 2023The Sole Arbitrator decides to rule without a hearing and allows a second round of written submissions limited to standing.
  7. 14 February 2024Award: appeal dismissed.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

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

Case ID
CAS 2023/A/9611
Claimant
Al Merreikh Sport Club
Respondent
Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)
Documents

Procedure: Appeal
Sport: Football
Matter: Disciplinary (except doping)
Outcome: Dismissed
Panel: Jacques Radoux
Source: Court of Arbitration for Sport case database.