FIFA faces Dutch class action over player transfer regulations
The Dutch Foundation for Justice said world soccer governing body FIFA's rules had affected approximately 100,000 players in European member states and the United Kingdom since 2002.
The foundation added that consultancy firm Compass Lexecon had estimated that damages could run into billions of euros, with the foundation's board member Dolf Segaar telling Dutch news agency NOS that "it is a billion-dollar claim".
The Dutch Football Association (KNVB) is among the associations to be named in the suit.
"This case is being brought in the Netherlands under the Dutch Act on the Settlement of Mass Damages in Collective Action (WAMCA), which allows this legal action to be launched by JfP on behalf of a large group of professional footballers," it added.
FIFA and the KNVB did not immediately respond to emailed requests for comment.
The foundation added that a preliminary analysis from global economic consulting company Compass Lexecon estimated that professional footballers collectively earned around 8% less over their careers than they would have due to FIFA's regulations.
"All professional football players have lost a significant amount of earnings due to the unlawful FIFA Regulations," foundation chair Lucia Melcherts said in a statement.
"'Justice for Players' is bringing this claim to help achieve justice for footballers and fairness."
The foundation added that the case was launched following a ruling on French player Lassana Diarra, who was fined 10 million euros ($11.56 million) by FIFA for leaving Lokomotiv Moscow one year into a four-year deal.
In October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union said some of FIFA's rules on player transfers went against European Union laws and free movement principles in the case linked to former Chelsea, Arsenal and Real Madrid player Diarra.
Following the ruling by the EU's top court, FIFA in December adopted an interim framework concerning the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
The interim regulatory framework affects the calculation of compensation payable if there is a breach of contract and the burden of proof in relation to both compensation payable and an inducement to breach a contract.
Justice for Players said it will be advised by law firm Dupont-Hissel, founded by Jean-Louis Dupont.
Dupont is the same lawyer who took the landmark case of Belgian Jean-Marc Bosman, which in 1995 cleared the way for players in the European Union to move to other clubs at the end of contracts without a transfer fee being paid.
Dupont-Hissel also represented Diarra in his case against FIFA, with Dupont saying in 2024 that a judgment backing the player would be a milestone in modernising football governance.
He added that it would allow players' unions and club associations to regulate their employment practices.
($1 = 0.8654 euros)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Best home security system without subscription
Finding the best home security system without a subscription is a priority for many homeowners who don't want to be tied into ongoing fees after the initial purchase. Paying hundreds of pounds for a full home security system is often only part of the story, since many companies charge a monthly or annual fee to make use of every feature. These fees often cover the cost of cloud video storage, making your home security camera and video doorbell recordings available online. Some companies also lock extra functionality, like battery and cellular backup systems, or facial recognition powered by AI, behind a paywall. Security specialists like Simplisafe and Verisure use your monthly payment to fund professional monitoring services. But what if you don't want to pay a monthly subscription fee for your home security system? You'll miss out on some of the features mentioned above, but in return you get an alarm and home security system that works without any ongoing costs. There are several companies – including Eufy, Blink, Yale and TP-Link – that sell security systems with no monthly fee. They often make cloud storage available as an optional extra, but since video recordings are recorded locally, on the system itself, the subscription is exactly that: optional. Why pay for a home security subscription? Before we get to the options for best home security system without a subscription, it's worth reminding ourselves why some systems demand a monthly or annual fee to unlock full functionality. Ring is perhaps the best-known example, since even its simplest video doorbells and security cameras require a subscription to work properly. Without paying the fee, Ring's cameras and doorbells don't store any video footage. They still stream live to the Ring app – so you can see who's at the door when they press the button. But past events can't be accessed, so you won't be able to see what motion triggered your security camera while you were asleep. Ring's alarm kit also requires a subscription to enable its cellular and battery-backup systems, which keep the system online during a broadband outage or power cut. Other systems, like those from Simplisafe and Verisure, charge a fee for cloud video storage, as well as for access to their 24/7 professional monitoring services. This is where trained agents respond to your alarm, make contact with you, and, if necessary, call emergency services. Best home security systems without a subscription At the time of writing, in mid-2025, my favourite home security system without a subscription is made by Eufy. This is because Eufy's security cameras and video doorbells all record footage locally, either to the device's own integrated storage, a microSD card, or to the company's HomeBase, which acts as a central hub with expandable storage. Eufy's third-generation HomeBase also adds artificial intelligence to your compatible cameras and doorbell, which helps your security system recognise friendly faces (like your family members) and not alert you when they're spotted. Cloud storage is offered by Eufy, priced from £3.99 to £12.99 a month, but it's purely optional. All other features are included in the up-front price of the hardware. It's a similar case with Yale, whose security system also works without a subscription. The Yale Smart Alarm kit is simpler than some rivals, with a fairly basic smartphone app. But it comes from a trusted brand and, unlike most other systems, includes a wireless external siren for mounting on an outside wall. The system can be expanded with more sensors, motion detectors and cameras, and a key benefit is how the devices have a 1km (0.62 mile) wireless range – far greater than that of Yale's rivals. Like Eufy, Yale offers an optional subscription. Called Secure Plan, this costs £9 a month and adds cellular backup to the alarm system, where it uses the mobile phone network to stay online if your broadband goes off. The plan also unlocks a system where up to three emergency contacts receive an automated call when your alarm is triggered; although, they are not contacted by a human, as with professionally monitored systems. Subscribing opens up cloud storage for Yale's cameras, too, and enables an AI-powered system for differentiating between the motion of people, pets, vehicles and package deliveries. Granted, it's a good-value package (and you get six months' free with some purchases), but Yale's system uses local storage by default, so paying the fee isn't strictly necessary. Without it, you still have a fully functional security system. Blink is another security system that runs without a subscription, but here things work a little differently. Blink cameras on their own require a cloud storage subscription, since they don't save footage locally. However, this changes if you also buy the Blink Sync Module 2, which costs £40 (or is often bundled with cameras for a discount) and acts as a hub for connecting multiple cameras and a doorbell. It also has a microSD card slot, into which you can fit up to 256GB of local storage – and avoid paying the monthly fee for saving footage in the cloud. Blink plans start at just £2.50 a month and unlock extra features, like improved live streaming, video sharing, photo capture and cloud storage, but paying isn't a necessity like it is with Ring, the other Amazon-owned security company. The pros and cons of not paying for a home security subscription Pros: Avoid ongoing costs (which also often increase over time) You control your recordings; no uploading to third-party servers Reduced feeling of being locked into a product ecosystem Keeps things simple, avoiding superfluous features Cons: No professional monitoring Misses out on extra functionality Limits your hardware choices Removes cellular backup (where available) Is paying a home security system subscription worth it? This depends on your budget and your security requirements. If all you want is a video doorbell on the front door and a security camera keeping an eye on your garden or drive, you'll be fine installing the devices and having them save footage locally. This even works if you want to build a larger system – perhaps even a whole home security platform with cameras, door sensors, sirens and motion detectors – if your primary goal is to be alerted to motion, then have that motion recorded. In this scenario, a subscription for extra features might not be worth it to you, especially if you pick Eufy products that have their own on-board storage and artificial intelligence. Subscriptions become worthwhile if you want more than these basics. If you want cloud storage, then paying a subscription is the only option, since companies don't offer this service for free. Similarly, if you want cellular backup for your Yale system, AI smarts from Blink, video storage from Ring or professional monitoring from Simplisafe and Verisure, then a subscription could be worth it.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Why 'sparky' Benjamin Sesko has long been touted to reach the top of the game... but Erling Haaland comparisons are misplaced despite their similar journeys
As someone who can execute a slam dunk as easily as a close-range header, it is no surprise Benjamin Sesko has always reached for the stars. A talented basketball player who idolises fellow Slovenian and NBA star Luka Doncic, the 6ft 5ins Sesko set his sights on taking Erling Haaland 's No 9 shirt from the moment he joined Red Bull Salzburg in 2019. Next season, Sesko may be trying to beat the forward to the golden boot.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Is this a good time to buy shares in Diageo?
The latest annual results from Diageo give every impression of papering over the cracks, reporting flat sales and lower profits, having lost a chief executive. Nik Jhangiani, the interim chief executive, produced as much positive spin as he could, even on the supercharged $625 million cost-saving programme, but could not disguise a 'challenging' environment led by rapidly changing tastes that, in the US at least, extends to competition from cannabis drinks. Operating profits fell 27.8 per cent to $4.3 billion, but before $1.4 billion of exceptional items the reduction was trimmed to 0.7 per cent, giving a healthy 21.4 per cent profit margin. The main exceptional was the sale of the US-based Ciroc subsidiary. Net profit was 39.1 per cent lower at $2.5 billion, translated into a similar-sized drop in earnings per share to 105.9 cents. That has just about let Jhangiani pay a 62.98 cents final dividend to maintain the annual payout at 103.48 cents. The stock market's reaction was to mark the shares up 89p to £19.04, suggesting investors were expecting worse. We will not have a clear picture of where the group is heading until the board confirms Jhangiani in the top job or hands it to someone else, probably in October. Whoever it is will have to do something drastic to halt Diageo shares' steady three-year decline. As Jhangiani said: 'We have a lot to do.' The stop-gap plan is to cut costs even more, promote the group's current winning brands — Guinness stout, Don Julio tequila, Johnnie Walker scotch and the blackberry-infused Canadian whisky Crown Royal — and move as quickly as possible to catch the surprisingly rapid transition to low-alcohol drinks. While no one brand can on its own put a rocket under annual sales of $20.2 billion, Jhangiani dropped hints yesterday that his researchers are stretching every sinew to come up with an alcohol- and calorie-light successor to longstanding hits such as Baileys Irish Cream. They have taken 40 per cent of the calories out of that with Baileys Deliciously Light, but so far have been unable to do without the alcohol. Meanwhile, Jhangiani is desperately trying to get his head around the unpredictable leisure habits of Gen Z, who are influenced by health considerations, other claims on their wallets and less compulsion to hit the bars on a night out. 'We need to make sure our offerings are tailored to social occasions,' he said. A lot of that boils down to moderation, the catch-all management term for no and low alcohol. While Guinness 0.0 has become a banker brand, the picture is fuzzy elsewhere. Price resistance is turning into shrinkflation with smaller spirits bottles in Asian supermarkets. And that is also influencing the alcohol content of ready-made cocktails. Overhanging the price question is President Trump's tariff campaign, which is due to add 10 per cent to UK exports to the US and 15 per cent on dispatches from Europe. Diageo reckons this could cost it $200 million a year at the operating profit level, mainly affecting the group's lucrative spirits brands. However, Jhangiani hopes to be able to offset as much as half of that with clever pricing. The Scotch Whisky Association buttonholed Trump on his recent Scottish visit to point out that if production were moved to the US, the product would no longer qualify as scotch. While gin, vodka and other spirits are a different matter, it will take years and plenty of capital to build distilleries in the US. However, Diageo has made a start with a factory in Alabama. Demand in the US and China is expected to be weaker for some time, and Europe is fragmenting. The group's former southern Europe sales force is being broken up into separate Spanish, French and Italian units to cater for different tastes. That adds to the costs that Jhangiani is trying to squeeze, while protesting that this need not mean job cuts. 'We want more feet on the street,' he said. Despite Monday's positive stock market response, in the face of strong headwinds for the next few years the company does not yet have a workable recipe to take the shares back up to anywhere near their 2022 level. Maybe it will have to turn into a full-blown soft drinks company. Advice AvoidWhy Future unclear until the CEO issue is sorted out
