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/10478 Hapoel Tel Aviv FC v. FIFA (CAS)

Why it matters

This award clarifies that in appeals against FIFA training compensation decisions under the FCHR, the training club whose entitlement is at stake must be joined as a respondent. Failure to do so results in dismissal of the appeal due to passive mandatory litisconsortium, protecting the training club's right to be heard. It reinforces procedural fairness in CAS football arbitration.

Summary

Hapoel Tel Aviv FC appealed a FIFA decision requiring it to pay EUR 135,123.29 in training compensation to New York Red Bulls (NYRB) for player Matthew Frank. Hapoel argued that NYRB had waived its right to compensation and that the training period was shorter than calculated. However, Hapoel did not include NYRB as a respondent in the CAS appeal. FIFA argued the appeal must be dismissed due to the absence of NYRB, whose rights would be directly affected. The Sole Arbitrator agreed, holding that NYRB had a direct legal interest and its absence violated its right to be heard. The appeal was dismissed without considering the merits, and the FIFA decision was confirmed. The case underscores the procedural requirement that all parties with a direct interest must be joined in CAS appeals against FIFA training compensation decisions.

The detail

Parties: CAS 2024/A/10478 Hapoel Tel Aviv FC v. FIFA

Outcome: Appeal dismissed; FIFA's EPP Determination and Allocation Statement confirmed.

Quantum: EUR 135,123.29

Applicable law: FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), FIFA Clearing House Regulations (FCHR), Swiss Code of Obligations

Issues in play: The case involved the requirement for mandatory joinder of a training club (NYRB) as a respondent in an appeal against a FIFA training compensation decision, and whether a waiver of training compensation could be considered without that club's participation.

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