Financial Fair Play. Legal challenge to UEFA FFP rules by Bosman Lawyer 9 May 2. Jean Louis Dupont, the lawyer who was successfully challenged football contract laws for Jean Marc Bosman in 1. Financial Fair Play rules with the European Commission. Football Clubs themselves are restricted from easily challenging the FFP rules other than through the Court of Arbitration for Sport CAS because the rules were voted in by the European Club Association. Hence Dupont is pressing the challenge on behalf of a Belgian football agent, Daniel Striani. There are several strands to the argument but notably, Dupont argues that FFP would reduce revenue for agents such as Striani. I have attached the un edited Press Release at the foot of this article. Dupont is unlikely to have an easy ride given that in March 2. EU Competition Commissioner formally backed FFP, saying the rules were essential for clubs to have a solid financial foundation. The next steps are outlined by Sports Lawyer Daniel Geey in this article. Fidget Spinner is a toy. Small child is used for entertainment purpose. This site explores the issues surrounding Financial Fair Play FFP in football. Priyanka chopra in ritu kumar at marrakech vendita cuccioli di cani toy di razza, cani di tutti i tipi, cuccioli di razza con certificazione, allevamento. Lettre K liste des joueurs de football commencant par la lettre K. Geey believes that the challenge process could take a number of years to conclude. UEFA responded to the news of challenge The rules encourage clubs to live within their own means, which is a sound economic principle aiming to guarantee the long term sustainability and viability of European football. Uefa believes that financial fair play is fully in line with EU law and is confident that the European commission will reject this complaint. Chucky Bride Of Chucky Full Movie more. The area of the FFP rules that UEFA could struggle to defend is the restriction on wealthy owners injecting cash into the club to fund spending e. The privacy dashboard. To use everything on this website, turn on cookies in your browser settings. Man City, Chelsea or potentially PSG. Almanaque Mundial Pdf Viewer. It might be hard to argue that sustainability is adversely impacted when the clubs debt doesnt grow despite big annual losses Man Citys owner for example, regularly injects funds to cover any losses and the club is effectively debt free. The first punishments for overspending are due to be announced from December this year onwards. Technically, the CFCB decision making panel is independent from UEFA and should not consider this challenge when determining the punishments for the clubs. However, if Dupont ultimately wins the challenge and FFP is deemed to be unlawful, UEFA would be liable for any historic damages that the sanctions had caused. The compensation could run into hundreds of millions of euros. There is therefore a distinct possibility that the punishments handed out during the first Monitoring Period may now be less harsh than would otherwise be the case. This challenge will be extremely welcome news to Paris Saint Germain and Manchester City. Duponts Press Release Today, 6 May 2. Hp Lightscribe Dvd Burner Not Working. Cv-rvJReKc/hqdefault.jpg' alt='Sean Tero Kolo' title='Sean Tero Kolo' />Mr Daniel Striani, player agent registered with the Belgian Football Association, represented by lawyer Jean Louis Dupont, lodged a complaint with the European Commission against UEFA in order to challenge infringements to fundamental principles of EU law caused by some provisions of the UEFA Financial Fair Play regulation FFP. Specifically, this complaint challenges the restrictions of competition caused by the Break even rule article 5. UEFA FFP regulation. Sean Tero Kolo' title='Sean Tero Kolo' />The rule imposes on clubs that participate in the UEFA Champions League or in the Europa League the obligation not to overspend the expenses of a club cannot exceed income. In effect, a club owner is prohibited from overspending even if such overspending aims at growing the club. The Break even rule which, according to article 1. Sean Tero Kolo' title='Sean Tero Kolo' />Treaty on the functioning of the EU, is an agreement between undertakings generates the following restrictions of competition Restriction of investments Fossilization of the existing market structure i. Reduction of the number of transfers, of the transfer amounts and of the number of players under contracts per club Deflatory effect on the level of players salaries and Consequently, a deflatory effect on the revenues of players agents depending on the level of transfer amounts andor of players salaries. At the same time, because of the aforementioned restraints, the Break even rule also infringes other EU fundamental freedoms free movement of capital as far as club owners are concerned, free movement of workers players and free movement of services player agents. Consequently, such restriction of competition and violation of EU fundamental freedoms cannot be justified by the objectives put forward by UEFA long term financial stability of club football and integrity of the UEFA interclub competitions. Moreover, detailed legal and economic analysis shows that, even if the Break even rule may appear initially a plausible concept, the rule is not able to achieve efficiently its objectives as presented by UEFA whereas other means are available to attain such objectives. For additional information, see The Wall Street Journal op ed published 2. March 2. 01. 3 http online. SB1. 00. 01. 42. 41. As far as the integrity of the UEFA competition is concerned, in order to avoid the risk that club X would jeopardize the smooth running of the competition because its owner stops mid season providing funds the overspending, it is not necessary to prohibit such overspending as implemented by the Break even rule, when it is sufficient to require overspending to be fully guaranteed for instance, by means of bank guarantees before the start of the competition and for its whole duration. In short, the current prohibition even assuming it to be justifiable quod non in the light of the pursued objective i. EU freedoms are concerned. In conformity with article 1. Treaties of the European Union, the complainant requests the European Commission to declare that the Break even rule is null. It is important to note this complaint does not at all question the legality of the UEFA rule also included in the FFP regulation that states that any club participating in the UEFA competition must prove before the start of the competition that it has no overdue payables towards clubs, players and socialtax authorities. In our view, this rule is justified in principle for the attainment of the integrity of the football competition and proportionate to this objective. A copy of the complaint has been provided to UEFA. ENDSNote to editors The Financial Fair Play FFP rules were first proposed by UEFA in 2. Clubs that do not comply with this break even principle will face sanctions, including a potential ban on participation in UEFA competitions.