Yeni Mersin Idman Yurdu A.S. v. Ivan Saraiva de Souza, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

At a glance

Parties

Yeni Mersin Idman Yurdu A.S. (Türkiye) v. Ivan Saraiva de Souza and the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

Case no.

CAS 2023/A/10043

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeals procedure under the Code of Sports-related Arbitration; FIFA regulations applied primarily, Swiss law subsidiarily

Panel

Prof. Petros C. Mavroidis (President), Mr Patrick Grandjean, Mr Mark Hovell

Sector

Football; sporting succession; disciplinary enforcement of a debt

Outcome

Appeal upheld and the FIFA Disciplinary Committee decision of 14 September 2023 set aside, because the player's complaint was time-barred (award of 28 May 2025).

Amount

The set-aside FIFA decision had ordered the club to pay EUR 235,000 as outstanding remuneration and EUR 645,750 as compensation for breach of contract, each with 5% interest per annum from 24 April 2013, and a fine of CHF 30,000. The appellant sought a contribution of CHF 20,000 to its legal costs; the player sought at least CHF 15,000. The costs rulings are not reproduced in the published award.

The dispute

Mr Saraiva de Souza, a former professional player, won a FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber decision of 2 July 2015 against his former club Mersin Idman Yurdu SK, now Mersin Talim Yurdu SK (YM1), for EUR 880,750 plus 5% interest from 24 April 2013. YM1 never paid. On 9 December 2017 the FIFA Disciplinary Committee found that YM1 had failed to comply, and the Turkish Football Federation deducted 114 points from YM1. On 1 August 2023 the player filed a new complaint against Yeni Mersin Idman Yurdu A.S. (YM2) as YM1's sporting successor. The FIFA Disciplinary Committee held YM2 liable for the debt under Article 21(4) of the FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC), fined it CHF 30,000 and threatened a registration ban. YM2 appealed. It denied sporting succession on the criteria of name, history, colours, logo, stadium, management, players and public perception, called the fine disproportionate, and argued that the claim was time-barred. FIFA and the player defended the succession finding and denied that the claim was time-barred.

Key holdings

1. The 2023 edition of the FDC applies, because the failure to comply was committed after it entered into force on 1 February 2023. FIFA regulations prevail over Swiss law where the two conflict, and sporting succession is regulated in a manner alien to Swiss law on the succession of economic agents. ¶¶ 97–98
2. The player's claim was time-barred under the five-year limitation period of Article 10(1)(c) and 10(2)(d) FDC. The last procedural act was the notification of the First FIFA DISCO Decision on 28 February 2018. That decision became binding on 22 March 2018, as no appeal was lodged. More than five years had passed when the player filed his complaint on 1 August 2023. ¶¶ 101–104, 107
3. Sporting succession is not a separate infringement that could restart the limitation period under Article 10(2)(a)–(c) FDC. A successor takes on the old club's debt only once FIFA has assessed and found succession. There is no infringement before that assessment, and it is not backdated to the date of succession. The player pointed to no infringement beyond the original non-payment and to no interrupting procedural act. ¶¶ 104–106
4. The only rational construction of Article 10(2)(d) FDC is that the five-year period runs from the date on which the final decision becomes binding. ¶ 108
5. The FIFA bodies should not have entertained the complaint of 1 August 2023. The appeal is upheld and the decision of 14 September 2023 is set aside, including the payment order and the fine. The Panel did not decide whether YM2 is YM1's sporting successor or whether the sanctions were proportionate. ¶¶ 109–111; operative part

Procedural history

1. 2 July 2015The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber orders YM1 to pay the player EUR 880,750 plus 5% interest from 24 April 2013. The grounds are notified on 8 February 2016.
2. 20 July 2016YM1's CAS appeal (CAS 2016/A/4476) is terminated because YM1 did not pay the advance of costs.
3. 9 December 2017The First FIFA DISCO Decision finds that YM1 failed to comply. It is notified on 28 February 2018.
4. 1 August 2023The player files a new complaint before the FIFA Disciplinary Committee against YM2 as the alleged sporting successor.
5. 14 September 2023The FIFA Disciplinary Committee holds YM2 liable for YM1's debt and fines it CHF 30,000. The grounds are notified on 25 September 2023.
6. 11 October 2023YM2 files its Statement of Appeal with CAS. The operative part of the award refers to an appeal filed on 10 October 2023.
7. 23 January 2024The Panel is constituted. It is the same Panel as in the related case CAS 2023/A/9807.
8. 20 February 2024Joint hybrid hearing in Lausanne with CAS 2023/A/9807.
9. 28 May 2025Award: appeal upheld and the FIFA Disciplinary Committee decision set aside.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Petros C. Mavroidis President, CAS Panel
• Patrick Grandjean Co-arbitrator, CAS Panel — appointed by the claimant
• Mark Hovell Co-arbitrator, CAS Panel — appointed by the respondent (jointly nominated by both respondents)

For the claimant

Juan de Dios Crespo Pérez · Umur Varat

For the respondent

FIFA · Débora Trombeta de Mattos Cesário · Rafael Queiroz Botelho

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• sporting succession
• successor club
• limitation period
• time-barred
• statute of limitations
• FIFA Disciplinary Code
• Article 21 FDC
• Article 10 FDC
• Article 25 RSTP
• non-compliance with FIFA decision
• unpaid player salary
• Mersin Idman Yurdu
• Türkiye
• football
• disciplinary fine
• registration ban
• interruption of limitation

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