FIFA’S DECISION-MAKING BODIES: THE PLAYERS’ STATUS COMMITTEE

1.       Introduction

Patrick William “Willie” Groves is widely considered to be the first player that cost over £100 when he was transferred from West Bromwich Albion to Aston Villa in 1893. Almost 125 years later, in 2017, Neymar became the most expensive player in history when he was transferred from Barcelona to Paris Saint Germain for EUR 222,000,000.

It is unlikely that, when The Football Association introduced a system of player registration in 18851 – thereby creating the concept of “a player transfer” – anyone would have imagined what the football transfer system was to become.

As the system started to grow, FIFA realised the need to have a uniform set of rules and hence, in 1991, it implemented the first edition of the rules governing the international transfer of players.2 At the same time, it instructed a committee with the task of ensuring compliance with, and the implementation and respect of the newly introduced regulations. The committee was named the Players’ Status Committee (“PSC”).

In this article, we explore FIFA’s PSC, examining its wide competences and explaining how its decisions, in both adversarial and administrative proceedings, are vital for the functioning of the entire football transfer system.

2.       Composition of the PSC

The PSC is one of the nine standing committees of FIFA.3  The main objectives of the PSC are:

(i) to update and monitor compliance with the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (“RSTP”);

(ii) to determine the status of players in the various FIFA competitions; and

(iii) to be responsible for the work of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (“DRC”).4

Likewise, the PSC holds judicial powers within FIFA’s dispute-resolution system, the origins of which go back to regulations that were in place in the early 1990s.5

At present, the PSC is composed of 24 members – including its Chairman and Deputy Chairwoman – representing national associations, leagues, clubs and players. It typically holds plenary meetings in March and October of each year; it can, however, just as any other standing committee, set up bureaus or sub-committees to deal with urgent or unexpected matters.6

In terms of its judicial powers, the PSC adjudicates in the presence of at least three members, including the chairperson or deputy chairperson, unless the case is of such nature that it may be settled by a single judge.7 In practice, the vast majority of cases are decided by single judges8 in meetings organised every eight to ten weeks, during which around 15 to 20 decisions are passed.

The PSC also has a sub-committee in charge of approving the registration of minor players,9 composed of the chairperson plus nine other members.10

3.       Jurisdiction of the PSC

The PSC – including its sub-committee and single judges – is competent to hear two types of disputes detailed in Arts. 22(c) and (f) of the RSTP as well as specific administrative procedures concerning the registration of (minor) players and their eligibility to participate with national teams.

A.      Disputes

(i) Employment-related disputes between a coach and a club or member association

In accordance with Art. 22(c) in combination with Art. 23(1) of the RSTP, the PSC is competent to deal with employment-related disputes between a coach and a club or member association of an international dimension. An “international dimension” will be assumed if the coach is considered a foreigner in the country where the club or member association is based.11

The parties can opt out of the general competence of the PSC and agree instead to refer their disputes to an “independent arbitration tribunal” at national level. Whilst not explicitly stated in Art. 22(c), the jurisdiction of such a national arbitration tribunal must stem from a clear, specific and exclusive arbitration clause contained in the contract at the root of the dispute.12

On the other hand, contrary to situations dealt with by the DRC under Art. 22(b),13 the national arbitration tribunal – under Art. 22(c) – does not need to be constituted within the framework of a member association nor respect the principle of equal representation of players and clubs. It does, however, need to be fully independent and respect fundamental principles of due process; i.e. the right to be heard, to contentious proceedings, to an impartial tribunal and to equal treatment.

Imagine, for example, an arbitration clause in favour of the London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”). If such a provision is agreed in an international contract between a player and a club, the DRC would still be competent to deal with any dispute arising from the said contract as the LCIA is not an arbitral tribunal constituted within the framework of a member association. Conversely, if faced with such a clause in the context of an international coach-club dispute, the PSC would likely decline its jurisdiction in favour of LCIA arbitration.14

(ii) national disputes between clubs

Besides employment-related disputes, the PSC is competent – under Art. 22(f) – to deal with disputes between clubs belonging to different associations, other than those related to training compensation and the solidarity mechanism. The most common club-club disputes dealt with by the PSC under this article are those arising from international transfer agreements.

Although Art. 22(f) appears to grant the PSC competence to deal with any type of international dispute arising between clubs, the PSC interprets the provision narrowly such that the contract at the root of the dispute must relate to the status or the transfer of a player. If this is not the case, the PSC will declare itself not competent to deal with the claim as it would be outside the scope of the RSTP. For instance:

• In a decision dated 16 January 2016, the Single Judge of the PSC refused to enter into the merits of a dispute involving the Cypriot club, Apollon Football (“Apollon”) and the Serbian club, Partizan FC (“Partizan”);15
• The dispute arose out of an “Agreement” concluded between the clubs whereby Apollon purchased from Partizan 50% of a player’s economic rights;
• The Agreement contained an arbitration clause in favour of FIFA and CAS;
• However, the player never played nor was ever registered for Apollon;
• Following the transfer of the player from Partizan to a third club, Apollon lodged a claim before FIFA against Partizan, for an alleged breach of the Agreement.
• In his decision, the Single Judge of the PSC held that - considering that the player was never registered for Apollon - the claim of Apollon was inadmissible as it was based on an agreement which did not relate to the status or transfer of a player.
• In the Single Judge’s opinion, the scope of application of Art. 22(f) of the RSTP is defined by Art. 1 which provides that the RSTP lay down global and binding rules concerning the status of players, their eligibility to participate in organised football, and their transfer between clubs belonging to different associations.
• Since the claim of Apollon did not relate to any of the situations described by Art. 1, the Single Judge of the PSC concluded that he lacked competence to adjudicate on the substance of the claim.16

B.      Administrative Procedures

(i) Provisional registration resulting from a refusal to deliver an ITC

Pursuant to Art. 9 of the RSTP, players registered with one association may only be registered with a new association once the latter has received an International Transfer Certificate (“ITC”). The procedure governing the issuance and receipt of an ITC for a professional player is regulated by Art. 8 of Annexe 3 of the RSTP.

In describing the ITC procedure, Art. 8.2(7) of Annexe 3 provides that the association with whom the player is registered shall not deliver the ITC if a contractual dispute has arisen between the former club and the player in relation to an existing, or the early termination of a, contract. In such a case, “FIFA may take provisional measures in exceptional circumstances”.

The competent body to issue the referred provisional measures is the Single Judge of the PSC, under Art. 23(4) of the RSTP.

In practice, whenever there is a refusal to issue an ITC, the association with which the player wants to be registered should submit a request to FIFA asking for the provisional registration of the player. The FIFA Administration will assess the request and then invite the association with which the player is currently registered to make clear its position – in particular, whether it insists on rejecting the issuance of the ITC.

If the player’s current association affirms the rejection, the Single Judge of the PSC will issue a decision either approving or rejecting the provisional registration. Given that, under Swiss Law17, a player cannot be compelled to remain with a particular employer against his/her will,18 in the vast majority of cases, the provisional registration is authorised.

(ii) Approval to register minor players

As a general rule, the international transfer of a player, as well as the first registration of a foreign player, is only permitted if the player in question is over 18 years old.19 There are, however, three main exceptions to this rule:

(a) if the player’s parents move to the country in which the new club is located for reasons not linked to football;

(b) if, subject to the new club complying with certain requirements in relation to the player’s education and accommodation, the transfer takes place within the territory of the EU/EEA and the player is aged between 16 and 18; or

(c) if the player lives no further than 50 km from a national border and the club with which the player wishes to be registered in the neighbouring association is also within 50 km of that border.

Pursuant to Art. 19(4) of the RSTP, every international transfer and first registration of a minor foreign player is subject to the approval of the Sub-Committee of the PSC.

In the event that an association wishes to register a minor, it should submit to FIFA an application for approval with all the necessary documentary evidence to show that one of the exceptions is met. Once FIFA has received the documentation, it will be submitted to the Sub-Committee of the PSC, or its Single Judge, who will authorise or refuse the registration.

(iii) Release and eligibility of players to play for a national team

In addition, the PSC is competent to hear matters related to the release of players to national teams pursuant to Annexe 1 of the RSTP. This will often be when a club refuses to release a player to his/her national team during an international window or a player does not resume duty with his/her club after an international window or final competition.

Equally, the PSC is competent to rule on matters concerning the eligibility of players to play for representative national teams. In particular, those related to a change of association – under Art. 8 of the Regulations Governing the Application of the FIFA Statutes – and to the exceptions to the five-year residency rule in Art. 7(d) of these Regulations.

4.       Jurisdiction ratione personae

With respect to the PSC’s ratione personae jurisdiction, Art. 6 of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber establishes an exhaustive list of persons subject to FIFA’s jurisdiction: member associations, clubs, players, coaches, or licensed match agents.

In this respect, there is an area of contention regarding the definition of a “Coach”. The days when a club’s coaching staff comprised only the Coach and their assistant are over. Instead, nowadays, clubs can have up to five or six people in charge of coaching different aspects of the team.

When faced with a claim, the PSC will usually refer to the definition given in CAS 2009/A/2000, which established that a Coach is the person in charge of leading the team on the sports ground during competition and practice. A person will also qualify as a Coach if they are responsible, at least partially, for the tactical choices regarding the team.

Claims lodged by any other staff who do not fall under the above description will be declared inadmissible by the PSC – for example, team doctors or purely fitness coaches.20

5.       Enforcement

In the same way as the DRC, the PSC is competent to impose sporting sanctions on clubs which fail to comply with its decisions pursuant to Art. 24bis of the RSTP. There is, however, a nuance as Coaches fall outside the scope of said article. As such, the enforcement proceedings in relation to a decision in a coach-club dispute will be heard by FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee.

6.       Conclusion

The PSC plays a central role within the structure of FIFA’s dispute-resolution system. Its competences are numerous and relate not only to the resolving of disputes but extend to administrative procedures which are fundamental for the proper functioning of:

• the entire transfer system;
• competitions at national and international level.

Moreover, its relevance is likely to grow in the near future, with the introduction of the new regulations governing agents. Indeed, it is plausible that, just as it was under the previous FIFA Agents’ Regulations, the PSC will again be competent to hear and adjudicate on these types of disputes.