Recently, the members' union of the International Professional Footballers' Union (IPFU) sent a letter to the
FIFA
Initiation of legal proceedings challenging the legality of FIFA's decision to unilaterally establish a schedule of international matches, in particular with regard to 2025
Club World Cup (soccer tournament)
arrangements.
players' union
It was argued that the decisions violated the rights of the players and their unions under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, while also potentially breaching EU competition law. The English Professional Footballers' Association (PFA) and the French Professional Footballers' Union (UFPF), with the support of the International Association of Professional Footballers in Europe (IAPF), have asked the Commercial Court of Brussels to refer the case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and to raise four questions for a preliminary ruling.
The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights guarantees a number of fundamental rights to workers and their trade unions, including the prohibition of forced labor, freedom of work, the right to collective bargaining, healthy working conditions and the right to paid leave. These rights are covered by Articles 5, 15, 28 and 31 of the Charter.
Players and unions have consistently emphasized that the current schedule of soccer matches is too cumbersome to implement. However, as highlighted in recent complaints filed by international unions and federations, FIFA has failed to engage or negotiate meaningfully and has unilaterally continued to expand the competition despite opposition from players' unions, which has included the decision to proceed with the newly expanded Club World Cup.
The new Club World Cup will be held in the United States from mid-June to mid-July 2025, and will feature 32 clubs and their players. The Club World Cup could add up to six weeks of extra work to an already intense schedule when preparation periods and travel time are factored in.
The Players' Union believes that such decisions by FIFA violate the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights without any justification. Ultimately, the Players' Union believes that the aim of this new competition is to increase the wealth and power of soccer's global governing body without due consideration of the impact on the players involved or other stakeholders in professional soccer.
In addition, the players' union argued that, according to the European Court of Justice's "European Super League" ruling, such unilateral, discretionary decisions were not based on a clear, objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and democratic legal framework and constituted a "restriction of competition by means of an aim" as defined in article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. restriction of competition", as defined in article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
FIFA considers that it is normal for unilateral abuses to occupy an area which, under modern open governance, naturally falls within the remit of the social partners and therefore of the negotiation of collective agreements between players' unions and employers' organizations.
The member unions of the European branch of the International Federation of Professional Footballers (IFPF) requested the Commercial Court of Brussels to refer this key issue to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling by way of four questions, which can be summarized as follows:
Has FIFA unilaterally and arbitrarily imposed a schedule of international competitions and, more specifically, a new competition called the "Club World Cup 2025" in violation of the rights of workers and trade unions under the EU Competition Act and EU competition law? Does the unilateral imposition of such a decision on the players violate the right of the players to collectively negotiate their terms and conditions of employment through their trade unions, as provided for in article 28 of the EU Competition Act? Does FIFA's decision to impose a substantial additional workload through the 2025 Club World Cup violate the right to healthy working conditions guaranteed by Article 28? Did FIFA's unilateral decision on the international competition calendar and the 2025 Club World Cup give rise to a "competition restriction" under article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Related to this case is Diarra v. FIFA, which will be decided by the European Court of Justice in the coming months. FIFA Europe (which is involved in the case together with Lassana Diarra) has insisted that the regulation of the labor market in professional soccer must come from a collective agreement between the social partners and not from a "transfer system" unilaterally imposed by FIFA, which is fundamentally incompatible with freedom of work and human dignity. The Court of Appeal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
David Trier, President of FIFA Europe, said, "Since all attempts at dialogue have failed, we must now ensure that the fundamental rights of the players are fully respected by taking the matter to the European Court of Justice, and in turn to the ECJ. This is not a question of stigmatizing a particular competition, but of denouncing the underlying issues and the last straw that broke the camel's back."
The member unions of the International Professional Footballers' European Union (IPFU) were represented before the Commercial Court of Brussels by the law firm DuPont Hysel. The action requested the Belgian court to refer four issues to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling. The four questions concern:
(b) Whether the rights of workers and their trade unions guaranteed by the EU Charter of Rights, in particular Articles 5, 15, 28 and 31, prohibit FIFA from scheduling the 2025 Club World Cup at a time that traditionally represents the players' annual "window" of rest, and whether it prohibits players/unions from being officially represented. Whether the unilateral imposition of such a decision on the players violates the players' right to bargain collectively on terms and conditions of employment under Article 28 of the Charter. Whether FIFA's decision to impose a substantial additional workload through the 2025 Club World Cup infringes the right to healthy working conditions guaranteed by Article 28. Whether FIFA's unilateral decisions on the international competition calendar and the 2025 Club World Cup gave rise to "match restrictions" under article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for the future scheduling of international soccer tournaments and will further the discussion of the rights and status of players and unions in professional soccer. Fans will be watching this legal process closely in anticipation of the final ruling.
