What is Locus Standi?

Locus Standi is a platform for the dispute-resolution world. It brings together arbitration, mediation and adjudication events, jobs and internships, and landmark arbitral awards explained in plain English, alongside the qualifications and pathways into the field. It was established in London at LIDW26 by the alumni of Queen Mary University of London.

Can Locus Standi help me understand a dispute?

Yes. Locus Standi offers free dispute help: paste your contract's dispute-resolution clause and a short note on what happened, and it works out the type of dispute, the governing law, your options, the right forum to file in, and drafts a basic document to start from, all in plain English.

What is the agentic AI case officer?

Locus Standi's workspace includes an AI case officer that helps practitioners run their matters: tracking stages and deadlines, raising alerts, organising to-dos and documents, and drafting. It is built for arbitrators, mediators and the institutions that administer disputes.

Where can I find arbitration events and internships?

Locus Standi keeps a live calendar of arbitration, mediation and adjudication events with one-tap calendar export, and a board of arbitration jobs and internships from institutions including the PCA, ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC and AIAC.

CAS 2023 A 9805 (CAS)

Why it matters

This case is highlighted for clarifying the definition of an "appealable decision" under the CAS Code in the context of FIFA disciplinary proceedings. It reinforces that purely informative communications, even if they confirm a sanction, do not constitute appealable decisions if the underlying sanction proposal was not challenged within the prescribed timeframe. The award emphasizes the importance of strict adherence to procedural deadlines in sports arbitration, particularly under Article 58 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, for challenging proposed sanctions.

Summary

Genoa Cricket and Football Club (Appellant) brought an appeal before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) against a "Confirmation Letter" issued by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) (Respondent). The dispute originated from Genoa's failure to pay EUR 300,000 plus interest to an intermediary, as previously ordered by a CAS award (CAS 2021/O/7877). Following the intermediary's notification of non-compliance, FIFA initiated disciplinary proceedings against Genoa under Article 21 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC) for failing to respect a decision. On 14 June 2023, FIFA issued a "Sanction Proposal" to Genoa, outlining a fine of CHF 20,000 and a potential player registration ban if the outstanding amount was not paid. Genoa responded on 20 June 2023, arguing that FIFA lacked jurisdiction to enforce an award in a commercial dispute involving an intermediary and requested termination of proceedings. FIFA then issued a "Confirmation Letter" on 22 June 2023, stating that the Sanction Proposal had become final and binding because Genoa had not rejected it within the five-day period stipulated by Article 58 FDC. Genoa appealed this Confirmation Letter to CAS. Genoa contended that the Confirmation Letter was an appealable decision and that FIFA lacked jurisdiction over the matter, as intermediaries were not subject to the FDC's enforcement mechanisms. FIFA, conversely, argued that the appeal was inadmissible because the Confirmation Letter was merely an informative communication, not a "decision" with legal effect under Article R47 of the CAS Code. FIFA asserted that Genoa's failure to object to the initial Sanction Proposal within the five-day deadline made it final and binding, and the Confirmation Letter simply confirmed this procedural outcome. The CAS Panel, applying the FIFA Statutes (May 2022 edition), the FDC (2023 edition), other relevant FIFA regulations, and subsidiarily Swiss law, found the appeal inadmissible. The Panel determined that the Confirmation Letter lacked the "animus decidendi" (intent to decide) and did not alter Genoa's legal position; it merely confirmed the final and binding nature of the Sanction Proposal due to Genoa's failure to respond within the prescribed five-day period under Article 58 FDC. The Panel distinguished this from other FIFA procedural contexts where confirmation letters *do* constitute appealable decisions. As the appeal was inadmissible, the Panel did not address the merits of Genoa's jurisdictional arguments. Consequently, Genoa was ordered to bear the arbitration costs and pay FIFA CHF 3,000 towards its legal fees.

The detail

Parties: Genoa Cricket and Football Club v. FIFA

Case number: CAS 2023 A 9805

Outcome: The appeal filed by Genoa Cricket and Football Club was declared inadmissible, and Genoa was ordered to bear the arbitration costs and pay FIFA CHF 3,000 as a contribution towards its legal fees.

Quantum: CHF 3,000 (plus arbitration costs to be determined by CAS Court Office)

Applicable law: FIFA Statutes (May 2022 edition), FIFA Disciplinary Code (2023 edition), other relevant FIFA regulations, and subsidiarily Swiss law. CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration (Articles R47, R58, R64.4, R64.5).

Issues in play: The central legal collision was between Genoa's argument that FIFA lacked jurisdiction to enforce an award involving an intermediary and that FIFA's "Confirmation Letter" was an appealable decision, versus FIFA's position that the appeal was inadmissible because the Confirmation Letter was merely informative, and Genoa had missed the deadline to challenge the initial "Sanction Proposal" under Article 58 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code. The case hinged on the definition of an "appealable decision" under CAS Code Article R47 and the procedural timelines of the FDC.

Read the full decision at Court of Arbitration for Sport (football, via FIFA) ↗

Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.

Back to the awards board