Maja Gothberg: How landmark CAS ruling sets new precedent for pregnant footballers

• The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled in favour of Swedish footballer Maja Gothberg in a groundbreaking case that establishes the first CAS precedent in football on a pregnancy-related contract termination
• CAS found Italian club Lazio Women unlawfully ended an employment relationship because of Gothberg's pregnancy and ordered the club to pay compensation
• The ruling also establishes an important precedent around the confidentiality of pregnancy-related medical information and illustrates that FIFA's Maternity Regulations are enforceable

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has ruled in favour of a Swedish women’s footballer in a landmark maternity case that could shape how pregnancy protections are applied across professional football in future.

The case, in which Maja Gothberg was successful against her former club Lazio Women, is the first in which CAS has found that a football club unlawfully ended an employment relationship because of a player’s pregnancy and awarded salary compensation and moral damages on that basis. 

The CAS ruling also establishes an important precedent around the confidentiality of pregnancy-related medical information and illustrates that FIFA's Maternity Regulations, which were strengthened in 2024, are enforceable. 

"This case shows that FIFA’s Maternity Regulations are not just words on paper and that they provide real protections for players," said FIFPRO's Legal Director Alexandra Gomez Bruinewoud, who played a prominent role in shaping the regulations. 

"The significance of this ruling goes beyond Maja Gothberg and confirms clubs cannot simply walk away from an employment relationship, even if this is not fully formalised, once they learn a player is pregnant."

Gothberg said: "This case was never only about football: it was about being treated fairly and with respect at an important moment in my life. The ruling sends a message that pregnancy should never be treated as a problem or a reason to deny a player labour opportunities."

The background

Gothberg had enjoyed a successful 2023/24 campaign with Lazio Women in which the Swedish defender helped the club secure promotion to the Italian top flight. 

In the summer of 2024, Gothberg and Lazio Women entered negotiations over a new contract. Although no agreement was signed, both parties had exchanged extensive communications and agreed on the key terms of a new deal.

Before formalising the contract, Gothberg discovered she was pregnant. While Gothberg did not have to legally disclose the pregnancy before signing the new contract, she wished to inform the club out of honesty and transparency.

Immediately afterwards, the relationship broke down. Lazio Women later argued that no contract existed and that the player no longer wished to continue. Gothberg maintained that the club had effectively withdrawn from the agreement because of her pregnancy.

In addition, shortly after informing the club of her pregnancy, Gothberg became aware that the information had been disclosed to team-mates without her consent; multiple players had contacted Gothberg to ask if her pregnancy news was true.

The dispute eventually reached CAS after an initial defeat before FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC).

The case also demonstrates the importance of documentary evidence in modern football disputes. With no signed contract on file, WhatsApp messages became central to establishing both the existence of an employment relationship and the club’s knowledge of Gothberg’s pregnancy.

These messages later helped prove Lazio Women did in fact have knowledge of Gothberg’s pregnancy, something which they initially denied and which the CAS award identifies as an important factor.

A victory for maternity protections

Until now, FIFA’s Maternity Regulations had been tested primarily in relation to pay during pregnancy. The Gothberg ruling demonstrates that the regulations, as intended, can also protect players from losing employment opportunities because they are pregnant.

Gothberg successfully relied on FIFA's maternity framework to challenge the club’s actions, and CAS ultimately found that she had been unlawfully disadvantaged because of her pregnancy.

For players, the ruling provides reassurances that the protections introduced by FIFA are more than just policy commitments and that they can be used to obtain real remedies when rights are violated.

A contract does not always need to be signed to be protected

Although Gothberg had not signed a new agreement with Lazio Women, CAS found that the parties had already agreed on the essential terms of their employment relationship and clearly intended to continue working together.

CAS made clear that where the essential terms have been agreed and both parties act as though a contract exists, a player is protected.

For footballers, this means that rights do not necessarily disappear simply because paperwork has not yet been finalised.

Clubs must prove pregnancy is not the reason for contract termination

The ruling also provides important guidance on how pregnancy cases should be assessed. Rather than relying on a direct admission, CAS examined the surrounding circumstances and found that Lazio Women’s change in position could only be explained by the player’s pregnancy.

Once the player had established that a contractual relationship existed and that it had been unilaterally terminated, the burden shifted to the club to prove that the termination was unrelated to her pregnancy. In this case, Lazio Women failed to do so.

The ruling is significant because it confirms that clubs cannot simply rely on the absence of a written admission or direct evidence. Where the facts indicate that a player’s pregnancy may have influenced a club’s actions, it is for the club to demonstrate otherwise.

Ruling shows pregnancy information is confidential medical data

The case was not only about a termination for pregnancy. One of the other significant aspects is that CAS found Gothberg’s pregnancy had been disclosed without her consent.

After informing the club of her pregnancy, Gothberg quickly became aware that other people within the club environment knew about it.

The panel recognised that pregnancy information constitutes sensitive medical data and that players have a right to keep such information private. Crucially, the CAS ruling makes clear that clubs have a responsibility to protect this information regardless of whether a player expressly asks for confidentiality.

The finding therefore establishes an important precedent for the protection of players’ personality rights, as the player is financially compensated for this breach.

The ruling expands football’s maternity case law

Sara Bjork Gunnarsdottir’s landmark maternity case established that players are entitled to pay and contractual protections during pregnancy.

The Gothberg case, however, addressed a different question: what happens when a club decides not to continue an employment relationship after learning a player is pregnant?

Viewed together, the two rulings form the foundation of football’s maternity jurisprudence. 

The Bjork case established that clubs must respect maternity rights once a player is pregnant. The Gothberg ruling confirms clubs cannot avoid those obligations by refusing to continue an employment relationship after learning of a pregnancy.

Lessons for players

While the Gothberg ruling does not create new maternity rights, it confirms that the rights already contained in FIFA’s regulations are meaningful and enforceable.

For players who may find themselves in a similar position, the message from those close to the case is clear: speak to your player union or FIFPRO.

"This result shows why player unions are so important," said Gothberg, who was assisted by Swedish player union Spelarforeningen. "They make sure players do not have to face these situations alone.

"I hope the case helps create a safer environment for players who want to have both a career and a family."