A potentially transformative legal battle is unfolding as over 100,000 current and former professional footballers challenge FIFA over long-standing transfer regulations they claim have unlawfully restricted their careers and earnings.
Described as a “seismic confrontation” by former Fulham midfielder-turned-lawyer Udo Onwere, the class action lawsuit was launched this week by Dutch foundation Justice for Players (JFP), in what could become the most significant legal challenge to football’s global governing body since the landmark Bosman ruling in 1995.
JFP’s case, which also targets the football associations of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Denmark, argues that FIFA’s transfer rules have violated EU competition laws for years, costing players billions of pounds in lost earnings. Their preliminary analysis estimates that the average affected player may have earned up to 8% less throughout their career as a result of these regulations.
The foundation is being advised by Belgian lawyer Jean-Louis Dupont, the same legal mind behind the 1995 Bosman case. That ruling forever changed football, granting players the freedom to leave their clubs without transfer fees once their contracts expired. Now, this latest case could go even further—giving players the right to terminate their contracts before expiry without paying compensation.
The case stems from a 2024 ruling by the European Court of Justice (CJEU) in favour of former Chelsea and Arsenal midfielder Lassana Diarra. Diarra had previously sued FIFA over the refusal to grant him an international transfer certificate (ITC) in 2015 after a contractual dispute with Lokomotiv Moscow. He had been suspended and ordered to pay £8.4 million to the Russian club.
Diarra’s lawyers successfully argued that FIFA’s rules, particularly those that penalise clubs for signing players with terminated contracts and those that allow associations to withhold ITCs, violated EU laws on freedom of movement and fair competition.
CJEU agrees with FIFA rules
The CJEU agreed, stating that FIFA’s regulations “impede the free movement of professional footballers wishing to develop their activity by going to work for a new club.” FIFA has since introduced interim amendments to the rules, but acknowledged they may still be challenged.
Now, armed with that verdict, JFP has filed its broader claim on behalf of players active since 2002. Its chair, Lucia Melcherts, said, “All professional footballers have lost a significant amount of earnings due to the unlawful FIFA regulations. In any other profession, people can change jobs freely. The same should apply to football.”
The foundation is confident FIFA’s defence will struggle under the weight of the CJEU’s ruling. Daniel Gore, an arbitration expert at Withers law firm, remarked, “The anticipated floodgate of claims has commenced, and FIFA’s finances could take a huge hit—just as it prepares for the expanded Club World Cup and the 2026 World Cup.”
FIFA has until the start of September to respond to the threat of litigation. While no official comment has yet been released, FIFA has previously defended its regulatory framework, stating it aims to protect players, clubs, and competitions alike.
However, growing calls for reform may make resistance more difficult. The European division of global players’ union FIFPro, which supported Diarra’s case, called the new lawsuit “a necessary practical response” and pledged to support fair compensation for affected players.
“It’s about securing the rights of all generations of footballers,” FIFPro said. “We must move away from unilateral decision-making that undermines players’ rights and establish more inclusive governance in the sport.”
If successful, the case could redefine contract and transfer norms globally—potentially giving players more control over their careers than ever before. As Onwere notes, this is not just another legal battle with FIFA. “It could prove to be as transformational as Bosman.”
