FIFA is facing a class-action lawsuit over its transfer rules that could include claims from every professional footballer who has played in the European Union or the United Kingdom since 2002, according to the newly created Dutch foundation behind the move.
Launched on Monday, the Amsterdam-based Justice for Players (JfP) is the first group to attempt legal action against world football’s governing body using the Court of Justice for the European Union’s (CJEU) ruling in the Lassana Diarra case last October.
The former Chelsea, Arsenal and Real Madrid midfielder won his decade-long legal battle against FIFA and the Belgian FA when the EU’s highest court ruled that some of FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) were against European competition law.
The case hinged on a FIFA decision to fine Diarra €10.5million (£9.1million/$12.1million) and ban him for 15 months for breaching his contract with Russian side Lokomotiv Moscow in 2014 “without just cause”.
The France international was blocked from joining Belgian side Charleroi during his period of suspension as the RSTP regime forced the relevant national governing body to withhold the International Transfer Certificate, a player needs to complete a cross-border move and it also made the player’s new club “jointly and severally liable” for any compensation he owed his former club.
Diarra appealed against FIFA’s ruling at the Court of Arbitration for Sport but only managed to shave some money off his fine, so he launched a counter-suit against the football establishment in a Belgian court that eventually worked its way to the CJEU, where he achieved a win which lawyers have been debating ever since.
Some believe it has called into question the entire transfer system, opening up FIFA to billions of euros and pounds in compensation, while others think the ruling’s impact will be more limited as it only challenged two elements of the rules: how the compensation a club is due when a player unilaterally terminates their contract is decided, and the idea that their new club is collectively responsible for the breach.
The founders of JfP, unsurprisingly, are in the former camp and they believe FIFA’s regulations had a detrimental affect on every professional player’s – male and female – salary. The logic here is that players have simply not exercised their right to terminate contracts because the consequences were so onerous and uncertain, whereas clubs have frequently ripped up deals knowing the system was stacked in their favour.
Citing “preliminary analysis” by economic consultancy firm Compass Lexecon, which also provided advice to the people behind the European Super League plan, JfP says it believes more than 100,000 players have lost approximately eight per cent of their potential career earnings because of FIFA’s unlawful rules.
Its case against FIFA and the football federations of Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany and the Netherlands will be filed in the Dutch district court of Midden Nederland because the country’s legislation is the most conducive to large class actions. And while it just FIFA and these five federations for now, more can be added later.
JfP’s board is comprised of two highly-experienced Dutch lawyers, Lucia Melcherts and Dolf Segaar, and former England assistant manager and Tottenham Hotspur technical director Franco Baldini. But it is also advised by Jean-Louis Dupont, Jean-Marc Bosman’s lawyer in perhaps the most significant lawsuit in football history as it gave players no longer under contract the right to move without a fee in 1995.
The costs of the class action will be met by Deminor, an international litigation funder that takes on cases in return for a cut of any awarded damages. According to JfP, this will be capped at 25 per cent of any damages plus the costs of the proceedings.
Current and former players are now encouraged to get in touch with JfP via its website, justiceforplayers.com, with the case starting in the first quarter of 2026. It is then likely to take at least three years before there is a ruling.
FIFA has not yet responded to a request for comment but European players’ union FIFPro Europe, which backed Diarra’s case, issued a statement that said this is “the anticipated practical response” to the CJEU ruling and it “recognises the fundamental right of players to pursue justice in what has constituted the most significant and long-lasting non-poaching agreement within the sports industry”.
However, there was a hint of olive branch in its final paragraph, as the players’ union said “it remains committed to pursuing constructive dialogue and collaborative solutions with relevant football and public authorities to safeguard the long-term sustainability of football”.