Aris FC v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

At a glance

Parties

Aris Football Club (Greece) v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

Case no.

CAS 2020/A/7259

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal procedure under the CAS Code; FIFA regulations apply, with Swiss law filling any gaps

Treaty

None. CAS jurisdiction rests on Article 58 of the FIFA Statutes and Articles 49 and 57 FDC

Panel

Anna Bordiugova (President), Rui Botica Santos, Lars Hilliger

Sector

Football; disciplinary sanctions

Outcome

Appeal partially upheld (award of 1 September 2022). The Panel confirmed that Aris FC breached Article 15 FDC but set aside the transfer ban for two registration periods because it had no legal basis.

Amount

No monetary amounts stated. The costs paragraphs of the operative part are redacted.

The dispute

In 2013 the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber and the FIFA Players' Status Committee issued four decisions ordering P.A.E. O Aris Thessalonikis ("Old Aris") to pay three players and an agent. The debts were never paid. In 2019 the FIFA Disciplinary Committee (DisCo) issued four decisions (the "Aris Decisions") against Aris FC as sporting successor of Old Aris. Each decision imposed a fine and a 30-day deadline to pay, with an automatic transfer ban if the club did not pay. Aris FC did not pay and did not appeal. On 3 January 2020, after the ban had taken effect, it registered the player Fiorin Durmishaj on loan from Olympiacos. It also appealed to the Hellenic Football Federation's court of arbitration (HFF CAF) against the HFF decision that withdrew his registration. On 28 April 2020 the FIFA DisCo found a new breach of Article 15 FDC and banned the club from registering new players for two entire registration periods. Aris FC argued that it was not the successor of Old Aris, did not know of the ban, and that the HFF was at fault for registering the player. It also argued that Article 15 required a fine and a 30-day deadline first and that the sanction was disproportionate.

Key holdings

1. No procedural defect. No FIFA rule bars a DisCo member who decided earlier cases involving the same party on a different subject matter from sitting on the later case. The issue does not affect the validity of the decision. ¶ 61
2. The Aris Decisions are final and binding. The club chose not to defend itself, request the grounds or appeal, and it is responsible for those choices. Whether Aris FC is the sporting successor of Old Aris is outside the scope of this appeal. ¶¶ 73–74
3. The ban applied automatically once the 30-day deadline expired and became effective with the transfer window opening on 1 January 2020; no further notification was needed. Because TMS users must check the system daily, the club could not reasonably have been unaware of the ban. ¶¶ 80–82
4. Aris FC breached Article 15 FDC. Under Article 8 FDC, infringements are punishable whether committed deliberately or negligently, and the HFF's error in registering the player does not change the club's position. In any event the club acted deliberately: it appealed to the HFF CAF and then fielded the player in 5 matches. ¶¶ 85–92
5. A further 30-day grace period and a fine would have been pointless, and a heavier sanction was justified. ¶ 100
6. However, Article 15 FDC gives no legal basis for an unconditional transfer ban for two registration periods. Article 15.1(c) allows point deductions or relegation only for persistent failure or repeated offences, which were not present here, and the DisCo did not rely on that provision. The reference in Article 15.3 to "other disciplinary measures being reserved" is not a basis for sanctions beyond those in paragraph 1. Before the Panel, FIFA called the conduct a "new breach". Points 2 and 3 of the DisCo decision were therefore set aside. ¶¶ 101–107; operative part

Procedural history

1. 2013The FIFA DRC and the FIFA PSC order Old Aris to pay four creditors.
2. 25 September – 7 November 2019The FIFA DisCo issues four decisions against Aris FC under Article 15 FDC. They impose fines, a 30-day deadline and an automatic transfer ban if the club does not pay. On 27 November 2019 FIFA confirms that the decisions are addressed to Aris FC.
3. 3 January 2020Aris FC registers the player Fiorin Durmishaj while the transfer ban is in force.
4. 17–23 January 2020The HFF Players Status Committee withdraws the registration. The HFF CAF overturns that decision.
5. 28 April 2020The FIFA DisCo finds a breach of Article 15 FDC and imposes a transfer ban for two registration periods.
6. 10 July 2020Aris FC files its Statement of Appeal at CAS. A stay of execution is granted on 31 July 2020.
7. 24 November 2020The Panel is constituted.
8. 8 February 2021Hearing held by videoconference.
9. 1 September 2022Award: appeal partially upheld; the breach is confirmed and the sanction is set aside.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Anna Bordiugova President, Court of Arbitration for Sport
• Rui Botica Santos Co-arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the claimant
• Lars Hilliger Co-arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the respondent

For the claimant

Konstantinos Zemberis

For the respondent

FIFA

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Article 15 FIFA Disciplinary Code
• transfer ban
• failure to comply with non-financial decision
• sporting succession
• Aris Thessaloniki
• nulla poena sine lege
• legal basis of sanction
• notification through national association
• TMS
• Hellenic Football Federation
• proportionality
• negligence and intent
• FIFA Disciplinary Committee
• football disciplinary

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