The 14th Update
[January 2025]
Welcome back to the 14th Update, a Newsletter curated by 14 Sports Law, where the world of sports law unfolds with the rhythm of a well-struck penalty kick. As we kick off 2025, we extend a warm New Year’s greeting to our readers, clients, and friends, may this year bring new victories, both on and off the field.
This edition features critical regulatory updates, including an in-depth analysis of the landmark Diarra case follow-through by FIFA, and certain important changes implemented in the various FIFA Regulations, not to mention the announcement of a new format for the FIFA Agent Exam.
Our mission remains unwavering: to decode the complexities of sports law and present them to you in an engaging format. 14th Update is your passport to the latest developments in the arena of sports law, business, and technology.Thanks for reading 14 Sports Law! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
As always, we invite you to share your thoughts, feedback, and questions with us at [info@14sportslaw.com].
Happy reading!
Best,
Luis Cassiano Neves
Founding Partner, 14 Sports Law
Founding Partner Luis Cassiano Neves was in Surrey, United Kingdom from 12 January – 14 January 2025 for the “International Forum on Sports Law” organised by Cambridge Forums.
Associate Gabriel Eguinoa and Junior Associate Aakash Batra co-authored an article on “The Diarra Saga – A Red Card to FIFA’s Transfer Provisions” published by the GNLU Centre for Sports and Entertainment Law. Read it here!
The team has been buzzing with activity, diving into exciting projects, while being intensely involved in the winter transfer window. Stay tuned for an exclusive transfer roundup in the next edition of the 14th Update.
FIFA Agent Exam Goes FULLY ONLINE – FFAR (January 2025 Edition)
The latest edition of the FIFA Football Agent Regulations (January 2025 Edition) (“FFAR”) has been published and comes into force as of 1 January 2025. No material change can be observed in comparison to the October 2022 FFAR, save for Article 6, which amends the structure for the FIFA Agent Exam.
This amendment has to be read in conjunction with Circular No. 1919 published on 13 January 2025, that clarifies that- starting this year, the FIFA Agent Exam goes completely online, enabling candidates to take it remotely without the involvement of the Member Associations. Notably, as of this year, the exam shall be conducted only once every year. Other than this, the remaining provisions of the FFAR are similar as the previous edition, and the worldwide suspension of certain provisions (such as service fee cap, client pays rule, prohibition of dual representation etc.), relating to District Court of Dortmund (Landgericht Dortmund) Case 8 O 1/23, as notified by virtue of FIFA Circular No. 1873 dated 30 December 2023, remains active until a final decision by the CJEU in Case C-209/23 – to be pronounced on 12 February 2025. Save the date!
For interested candidates, please note that the applications for the FIFA Agent Exam shall remain open from 4 March to 17 April 2025, with the exam set for 18 June 2025.
Need help in preparing? Watch this space and feel free to contact us for more information.
Football Agent Annual Report 2024 Published by FIFA
The FIFA Football Agent Annual Report 2024 reveals that clubs in men’s professional football spent a whopping $709.6 million on agent fees in 2024. English clubs led the pack, splashing over $193 million. Overall, despite a 20.2% drop from the 2023 record, it’s still the second-highest ever. Italian clubs followed with $66.4 million.
Meanwhile, the Netherlands topped incoming transfers involving engaging-club agents at 46.7%, and Serbia led outgoing transfers with releasing-club agents at 30.3%. In women’s football, agent spending more than doubled from 2023, signalling major growth, with total expenditures nearing $3.1 million in 2024. This represents a remarkable increase – more than six times the spending in 2020 and 2.2 times the 2023 figure of $1.4 million. These numbers highlight the escalating role of agents in modern football’s financial landscape.
RFC Seraing v. FIFA et. al.: AG Tamara Ćapeta’s Opinion Challenges CAS Arbitration Framework
On January 16, 2025, Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta delivered a pivotal opinion in Case C-600/23, RFC Seraing v. FIFA, urging the CJEU to enable full judicial review of CAS arbitration awards by EU courts. This is a case referred to the CJEU for adjudication by the Belgian Cour de Cassation. For a quick background, one must note that this case essentially originates from FIFA sanctions on RFC Seraing over third-party ownership (TPO) agreements, and at its heart challenges the compliance of CAS decisions with the principles of res judicata and effective judicial protection. Highlighting FIFA’s mandatory arbitration clauses and self-regulatory system, the Advocate General has argued for enhanced judicial safeguards under EU Law, in specific arguing that domestic courts should have full power to review certain CAS awards.
While this opinion is not binding on the CJEU for the purposes of deciding the case, in any case, it is intriguing to note that it makes ground-breaking analysis, and raises pressing questions such as: (i) Will the CAS be forced to create an alternative seat for EU related vertical disputes, in an EU Member State? (a concern also debated last year following the ruling in Case C-124/21 P, International Skating Union v. European Commission); (ii) questions on whether the mandatory nature of sports arbitration warrant a limitation on the application of res judicata principle and an enhanced review of CAS awards under EU law?; (iii) potential implications beyond football, likely influencing other sports federations’ governance structures, (iv) whether CAS awards from mandatory arbitration fall outside the New York Convention?; and (v) understanding the scope of EU public policy. The full opinion can be found here. It is imperative to take note that the analysis pertains only to vertical disputes which are in the minority. We shall be closely monitoring this case in the 14thUpdate.
Diarra’s Follow-Through – FIFA’s Interim Framework and Latest RSTP
There are now some clarifications, albeit temporary, with respect to the changes in the disputed provisions in response to the Diarra Judgment delivered by the CJEU in case C-650/22 on 4 October 2024. For a quick recap, we refer you to the Special Edition of the 14th Update on Diarra, published back in October 2024. Following the judgment, and FIFA Correspondence dated 25 November 2024, by virtue of which FIFA suspended, effectively and immediately, all disciplinary measures involving the disputed provisions ruled to be in breach of EU law by the CJEU – an Interim Framework and Explanatory Notes was published by FIFA on 23 December 2024, by virtue of Circular No. 1917, enunciating upon the relevant amendments (temporary) in the FIFA RSTP (January 2025 Edition) as well as the Procedural Rules (January 2025 Edition).
A significant update is a better codification of “just cause” in Article 14 of the RSTP. It allows termination without consequences if a party can no longer, in good faith and reasonableness, maintain the contractual relationship. This codification aligns with the long-standing and established jurisprudence, emphasizing a fact-specific approach as to determining just cause. Compensation for breaches of contract under Article 17.1 of the RSTP now formally adheres to the “positive interest” principle. Factors considered include the actual damage incurred, case-specific facts, and applicable national laws, provided that their relevance is now more substantiated, not to mention that amendments to Annexe 2 of the RSTP extend these principles to coaches. The framework also revises joint and several liability under Article 17.2, reversing the presumption of automatic liability for the new club in contract breaches. Claimants must now prove inducement by the new club. Similarly, sanctions for inducing contract breaches (Article 17.4) are now contingent on evidence provided and will only apply where concrete proof of inducement exists. This approach essentially prioritizes evidence-based decision-making. The interim framework also streamlines the International Transfer Certificate (“ITC”) process under Annexe 3, Article 11 of the RSTP. ITCs must now be issued within 72 hours of a request. If the issuing association fails to comply, player registration becomes automatic. In exceptional cases, FIFA may intervene to ensure procedural fairness and prevent disputes from obstructing transfers.
Regarding the Procedural Rules, let us underscore that an express clarification has been added to Article 13.6, stating that parties have a duty to collaborate in the establishment of the facts and to comply with evidentiary requests, which can also be made by a party to the relevant proceedings. The Football Tribunal will also be entitled to draw an adverse inference from a party’s reaction to an evidentiary request. The amended rules introduced by FIFA under the interim framework will apply retroactively to all cases pending before the Football Tribunal as of 1 January 2025. Parties involved in these disputes will have opportunities to present arguments regarding the impact of these changes on their cases.
Latest Edition of the FIFA Clearing House Regulations
The January 2025 edition of the FIFA Clearing House Regulations introduces two key amendments compared to the October 2022 edition. Under Article 9, the EPP Review Process has been extended from 10 to 15 days, allowing for a more thorough evaluation. Additionally, Article 17 now specifies that the 2.5% levy on calculated training rewards, imposed as a sanction on clubs or associations for failure in the initial compliance assessment, is no longer automatic but optional, providing greater discretion in its application.
Disclaimer: This Newsletter is the intellectual property of 14 Sports Law. Readers are strictly advised not to take any action based solely upon the information and analysis provided herein without seeking professional advice. The authors as well as 14 Sports Law explicitly disclaim any and all liability to anyone who has read this Newsletter, or otherwise, in respect of anything, and of consequences of anything done, or omitted to be done by any such person in reliance upon the contents herein. It is imperative that readers exercise caution and seek legal counsel before relying on the information presented in the Newsletter.