why the “Lassana Diarra affair” could revolutionize the transfer market

A decision from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) expected on Friday in the Lassana Diarra case against Lokomotiv Moscow could shake up the transfer system in football by allowing a player to unilaterally terminate his contract.

“In a way, the Lassana Diarra affair is the Bosman 2.0 affair”believes the Belgian lawyer Jean-Louis Dupont, who defends Diarra and was already involved thirty years ago with the Belgian Jean-Marc Bosman, at the origin of the 1995 judgment which bears his name and had end to quotas for foreign players in a club.

Free competition within the EU

For once, a decisive match for international football is being played in Luxembourg, the seat of this European jurisdiction.

“If this judgment reflects the conclusions of the Advocate General of the CJEU, the current Fifa transfer system will have expired”adds Me Dupont. The rules that prevented Diarra from finding a new employer club “violates the free movement of workers”he says.

The lawyer highlights the conclusions rendered on April 30 by the first advocate general of the Court of Justice, the Pole Maciej Szpunar, according to whom the rules of Fifa “limiting the ability of clubs to recruit” would be contrary to the principle of free competition within the EU.

Other lawyers familiar with the case are more measured and do not foresee a “Lassana Diarra stop” of the magnitude of the Bosman ruling. The case of the Belgian player, which already concerned the free movement of players, shattered all the rules limiting players of different nationalities in club squads, liberalizing the transfer market in Europe.

Unilateral termination of contract

That concerning the dispute of the ex-French international (34 caps) with Lokomotiv could allow a player “in the loft”that is to say clearly excluded from the group, to unilaterally terminate his contract without his future club being responsible for the legal risks, the fine that he could incur.

The story goes back ten years. In 2014, “Lass” got angry with the Moscow railway workers’ club because he did not accept a drastic reduction in his salary. Lokomotiv had claimed 20 million euros from him, reduced to 10.5 million euros, for the damage.

According to FIFA regulations, if a player terminates his contract unilaterally and “without just cause”he must pay compensation which includes his remuneration and benefits until the end of his contract. And a purchasing club could be affected by compensation.

For his part, the player requested six million euros from Fifa, believing that its transfer rules had prevented him from practicing his profession during most of the 2014-2015 season.

With this sword of Damocles, the clubs were not rushing to recruit Diarra. In Belgium, Charleroi had given up, afraid of the possible legal and financial consequences.

Support from the Global Players Union

The former Blue, who bounced back at Olympique de Marseille in 2015, decided to take the matter to court, supported by the global players’ union, Fifpro.

After several twists and turns, the Belgian court seized, whose jurisdiction Fifa contested, asked in 2022 a so-called question “prejudicial” to the CJEU.

In essence the question was as follows: is the regulation of the status and transfer of players compatible with EU competition law and free movement?

According to Advocate General Szpunar, the provisions applied by Fifa “are likely to discourage and dissuade clubs from hiring the player for fear of a financial risk”.

“Limiting the ability of clubs to recruit players necessarily affects competition between clubs in the market for the acquisition of professional players”the Polish jurist further argued.

If the CJEU were to follow this opinion, the players could, if they one day find themselves in the loft, leave their club without fear of being legally stuck afterwards.

SEE ALSO – Goals, trophies, individual awards…The incredible career of Antoine Griezmann in the French team