FootyChatter.com

By Kim Morrissey Published: 20: 10 AEST, 4 October 2024 | Updated: 21: 26 AEST, 4 October 2024 View comments Former Chelsea, Arsenal and Real Madrid midfielder Lassana Diarra who left little to no imprint on the game when he retired from PSG and the game in 2019 has an opportunity to carve his name into the history books today.   The former French footballer is challenging the legitimacy of Fifa's entire transfer system with his case which is being labelled the 'new Bosman'.   The ECJ said on Friday that these rules, which pertain to the freedom of movement between football clubs, are contrary to European Union law on competition and freedom of movement.   The case arose following Diarra's disasters attempt to depart his former club Lokomotiv Moscow back in 2014, where an initial ruling meant that he had to pay the club millions in compensation if he forced a move away from the club. The European Court of Justice has ruled on a landmark legal case involving Lassana Diarra The former PSG, Real Madrid and Arsenal player has been involved in an ongoing legal battle  The Court of Justice's ruling could have potentially explosive for the future of club football and transfers surrounding them.   We may potentially see a catastrophic change in how football dealings are handled moving forward, giving more power to the players and their agents and less to the clubs. The basis of the case surrounds Lassan Diarra's contract with Lokomotiv Moscow and the termination of said contract. The French footballer signed for the Russian club in 2013, starting brightly, however relations between the two bodies quickly became sour when Lokomotiv tried to reduce his salary, a move the club believed was justified following a stint of poor performances. Diarra refused to accept the pay deduction, resulting in the Frenchman terminating his own contract with the Moscow based club the following year in 2014 (which still had three year left). Following the Frenchman's decision to terminate his contract, the Moscow based club decided to sue their former player for a breach of contract, taking the case to FIFA's dispute resolution chamber, which sided with the club. The basis of the case revolves around Lassana Diarra's contract with Lokomotiv Moscow and the termination of said contract The ruling saw am imposed ban on the player and he was ordered to pay €20m compensation to the club. Diarra made a counterclaim, referring the case to the Court of Arbitration for sport by Diarra, however CAS upheld the Fifa ban on appeal and ordered that Diarra pay Lokomotiv €10. 5m plus interest. Following the termination of his contract, the free agent was in pursuit of a new club. The Frenchman was then offered a deal by Belgian side Charleroi subject to a guarantee from FIFA and the Belgian football that they were not be liable to pay any of the €10. 5m owed to Lokomotiv. However FIFA were unable to guarantee the club wouldn't have to pay an amount, pointing to agreements being required between national FAs resulting in Charleroi pulling out of the deal. This prompted the Frenchman to bring fresh legal action to the fold in 2015, with the new lawsuit claiming that the player had been prevented from doing his job, as FIFA had refused to issue the International Transfer Certificate (ITC), which the Charleroi needed at the time to register him with the Belgian FA. Diarra in this current lawsuit is claiming this amounted to a restriction of trade and was in breach of the European labour law. The lawsuit claims that the Diarra had been prevented from fulfilling his job, as FIFA had refused to issue the (ITC), which the Charleroi (pictured) needed at the time to register him  If the Frenchman wins, the case will be referred back to the Belgian courts, and if they are to apply the CJEU ruling, FIFA will be forced to rewrite or fine tune their current transfer rulebook and align closer with EU law. What that means for the future of the football transfer market is still unclear, however a major shake up should be expected, with more power, flexibility and freedom of movement being gifted to the players and their agents. Meaning players could have a notice period worked into their contract, which is the case in most regular jobs as well as the right to walk away from a contract in search of a new job.   If the ruling goes against Diarra, the Frenchman will be ordered to pay the club the compensation surrounding his contract termination in 2014.   If the Diarra wins, the case will be referred back to the Belgian courts, and if they side with CJEU, FIFA will be forced to rewrite their current transfer rulebook to align closer with EU law Speaking about the case last April, the CJEU own advocate general Maciej Szpunar said: 'There can be little doubt as to the restrictive nature of Fifa’s regulation on the status and transfer of players.   'By their very nature, the contested provisions limit the possibility for players to switch clubs … The contested provisions … necessarily affect competition between clubs on the market for the acquisition of professional players. 'The consequences of a player terminating a contract without just cause are so draconian that it is highly unlikely that a player will go down this route.   'The contested provisions are designed in such a way as to have a deterrent effect and send a chill down each player’s spine. ' Published by Associated Newspapers Ltd Part of the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday & Metro Media Group