CAS 2023 A 9807
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 22 Nov 2024
Why it matters
This case clarifies the application of Article 21(4) FDC on sporting succession in football, emphasizing that no single criterion is decisive and that the overall assessment of public perception is key. It also confirms that a creditor need not sue both the original and successor club jointly; due diligence is satisfied by pursuing the original debtor first.
Summary
The dispute concerns whether Yeni Mersin Idman Yurdu A.S. (YM2) is the sporting successor to Mersin Idman Yurdu SK (YM1) and thus liable for YM1's debt to player Spas Borislavov Delev. YM1 had been ordered by FIFA in 2015 to pay Delev EUR 1,200,000 plus interest, but never paid. After YM1 ceased participating in competitions, Delev sought payment from YM2, arguing it was YM1's successor. The FIFA Disciplinary Committee (DISCO) agreed, and YM2 appealed to CAS. The CAS Panel applied Article 21(4) FDC, which lists non-exhaustive criteria for sporting succession: name, logo, colours, players, management, stadium, etc. The Panel found that while ownership differed, the name, logo, colours, player overlap, timing (YM2 rising as YM1 declined), and attempts to link to YM1's history all pointed to public perception of succession. The Panel rejected YM2's argument that Delev should have sued both clubs jointly, holding that Article 21(4) imposes joint liability but creditors need only pursue the original debtor first. The appeal was dismissed, confirming YM2's liability for the debt and the CHF 30,000 fine.
The detail
Parties: Yeni Mersin Idman Yurdu A.Ş. v. Spas Borislavov Delev & FIFA
Case number: CAS 2023 A 9807
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; YM2 is the sporting successor to YM1 and liable for EUR 1,200,000 plus interest and CHF 30,000 fine.
Quantum: EUR 1,200,000 plus 10% interest p.a. from 15 November 2012
Applicable law: FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC) Article 21(4) (formerly Article 15(4)); FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) Article 25(1) (formerly Article 24ter); Swiss law
Issues in play: The key issue was whether YM2 was the sporting successor to YM1 under FIFA regulations, applying a non-exhaustive list of criteria (name, logo, colours, players, management, etc.) to determine public perception of succession.
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.