X. v. Y. SAD [Solidarity Contribution for a Football Player’s Education] No. 4A_18/2008 - Swiss International Arbitration Law Reports (SIALR) - 2008 Volume 2 No. 2

Page Count:

14 pages

Media Description:

1 PDF Download

Published:

December, 2008

PDF214.87 KB

$40.00

Description:

Originally from:

Preview Page

Headnote

■ A petitioner seeking to have an award set aside is under a

procedural duty arising under federal law to explain each of the

complaints made against the award in his application to set aside

(confirmation of previous decisions).

■ The complaint that the arbitrator erred in interpreting and

construing a legal or contractual provision, or a provision of similar

nature, is per se inadmissible in setting aside proceedings

(confirmation of previous decisions).

■ Where a complaint made in setting aside proceedings against an

award in substance amounts to the proposition that the arbitrator

erred in failing to accept the petitioner’s argument on a given point,

such complaint is in principle inadmissible as the Swiss Federal

Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to review awards on the merits.

Setting aside proceedings are to be carefully distinguished from an

appeal on the merits; no such appeal lies against an award made in

an international arbitration in Switzerland.

Summary of the Decision

X. is an Argentinian football club and member of the Argentinian

Football Association. Y. SAD is a Spanish football club and member of

the Royal Spanish Football Association. Both national associations are

in turn members of FIFA.

While a teenager, a young football player played for X. Some years

later, and after playing with club Z., the young player was transferred to

Y. SAD in consideration of a transfer fee in an amount of EUR 7,400,000.

Based on this transfer, X. requested FIFA to order Y. SAD to pay X. a

solidarity contribution for the player’s education and training under the

FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.

The Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) of FIFA dismissed X.’s

claim on the basis that transfers of players within the same national

association were governed by the regulations of the national association

concerned.