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 2024 A 10431 (CAS)

Why it matters

This case clarifies the criteria for sporting succession in football, particularly when an existing club transforms to assume the identity of a defunct club. It confirms that a club can be deemed a sporting successor even if the original club still exists at an amateur level, based on objective indicators like name, colours, stadium, shared personnel, and public perception. The decision reinforces FIFA's ability to hold successor clubs liable for debts to protect player creditors.

Summary

The case concerns a dispute between Yeni Mersin Idmanyurdu Futbol A.S. (New Club) and player Milan Mitrovic, with FIFA as respondent. The Original Club, Mersin Idmanyurdu SK, owed Mitrovic EUR 175,000 in unpaid salaries and EUR 37,000 compensation under a 2018 FIFA DRC decision. When the Original Club failed to pay, Mitrovic sought disciplinary action against the New Club, claiming it was the sporting successor. FIFA's Disciplinary Committee agreed, ordering the New Club to pay the debt plus a CHF 15,000 fine. The New Club appealed to CAS, arguing it was a separate legal entity. The CAS Sole Arbitrator applied the sporting succession test from CAS 2007/A/1322 and CAS 2011/A/2646, examining factors such as name similarity (both include 'Mersin Idman Yurdu'), shared colours (red and navy), similar logos, same stadium, transfer of 23 amateur players, overlapping board members, and public perception (supporters viewed the New Club as the resurrection of the Original Club). The Arbitrator found that the New Club had deliberately transformed to assume the Original Club's identity, benefiting from its fan base and reputation. Despite the Original Club still existing as an amateur entity, the objective evidence established sporting succession. The appeal was dismissed, and the New Club was ordered to pay the debt, fine, and a contribution to the player's legal fees.

The detail

Parties: Yeni Mersin Idmanyurdu Futbol A.S v. Milan Mitrovic and FIFA

Case number: CAS 2024 A 10431

Outcome: Appeal dismissed; FIFA Disciplinary Committee decision confirmed; Appellant ordered to pay debt and fine.

Quantum: EUR 175,000 plus interest and EUR 37,000 compensation; CHF 15,000 fine; CHF 5,000 contribution to player's legal fees

Applicable law: FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC) 2023, particularly Article 21 (sporting succession) and Article 6.4 (sanctions); CAS jurisprudence on sporting succession

Issues in play: The key legal issue was whether the New Club (Yeni Mersin) was the sporting successor of the Original Club (Mersin Idmanyurdu SK), making it liable for the Original Club's debts under FIFA disciplinary rules.

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