See what's happening on Facebook Twitter YouTube Flickr


FIFPro’s Legal Department severely criticizes the CAS-verdict in response to the appeal which FC Sion and Essam El-Hadary had initiated against the ruling which FIFA’s DRC had previously given in the case of Sion and El-Hadary against Al-Ahly. ‘Incomprehensible hocus pocus.’


El-Hadary cancelled his contract at Al-Ahly in 2008. He made use of the Webster-ruling. The CAS ruled that FC Sion had to pay a compensation of $796,500. The Egyptian keeper was suspended for the first four months of the coming season, while Swiss club FC Sion was banned from signing players for the next two transfer windows.


Wil van Megen and Ivo Ouwehand from FIFPro’s Legal Department are disappointed by this verdict. In an article they heap criticism on for example the way the CAS has calculated the compensation. ‘The reasoning to take into account the amount of USD 600,000 that Sion was willing to pay, to add the salary of the new contract to this amount and then to deduct the salary of the old contract is an incomprehensible hocus pocus of the CAS Panel’, both men judged.


‘If Sion would have offered a salary of USD 800,000 to the player, the way of calculation of the Panel would have largely exceeded the amount requested by Al-Ahly for the complete transfer. This illustrates that inappropriate criteria are applied here by the Panel.’


Van Megen en Ouwehand have more doubts about the CAS-ruling. In their view the CAS did not comply with the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the CAS Panel ignored the Webster-ruling, the CAS Panel exceeded it’s legal powers, and the CAS-verdict is conflicting EU-law. ’It would have been possible to solve the matter and stay within the limits of the regulations and the law’, is the conclusion of both lawyers from FIFPro’s Legal Department.


Click here to read the complete article by Wil van Megen and Ivo Ouwehand.