CAS 2024 A 10718
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 17 Feb 2025
Why it matters
This case clarifies that in CAS appeals against FIFA decisions on training compensation, the training clubs and federations whose rights are directly affected must be joined as respondents. FIFA alone cannot represent their interests. The appeal was dismissed because Gent failed to name them, highlighting a procedural requirement that can bar substantive review.
Summary
KAA Gent appealed FIFA's decisions requiring it to pay training compensation to four Congolese clubs (Mokanda, TOTAL, Caïman, Panthère) for the transfer of player Ceti Junior Taty Tchibinda. Gent argued the player was a professional before joining them, based on a transfer agreement with Diables Noirs stating he had a professional contract. However, FECOFOOT's player passport showed he was always registered as an amateur. The FIFA DRC Single Judge upheld the amateur status, relying on the passport as key evidence. Gent appealed to CAS but only named FIFA as respondent, not the training clubs or federations. The Sole Arbitrator found that deciding the merits without hearing those clubs would violate their due process rights. Since Gent did not add them as respondents within the appeal deadline, the appeal was dismissed and FIFA's decisions confirmed. The case underscores the necessity of joining all directly affected parties in CAS appeals concerning training compensation.
The detail
Parties: KAA Gent v. FIFA
Case number: CAS 2024 A 10718
Outcome: Gent's appeal dismissed; FIFA's decisions confirmed.
Applicable law: FIFA Clearing House Regulations (FCHR), FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration
Issues in play: The dispute concerned whether the player was registered as a professional or amateur before his transfer to Gent, and whether FIFA could be the sole respondent when the training clubs' rights were directly affected.
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.