Welcome to the TTP community

Be apart of something great, join today!

2014 Vancouver Whitecaps

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dude

Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 23, 2001
16,735
4,590
Tokens
15,679
Dirty Money
1,957
Wow.

You know who the luckiest SOB involved w/ the Cap's over the last 6 months is?

Beside Camilo, that is?

The man's name: Martin Rennie. He's sitting somewhere laughing about this, and sending Robo a text that says: "LOL".
 

dutch08

Active Member
Sep 21, 2005
146
55
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
Whitecaps statement that Camilo is under contract and own the his international rights. Queretaro cannot sign him without the rights. Things are looking bad for Camilo, and Queretaro. Maybe just coming out as a selfish POS.
 

TulioMaravilha

Active Member
Mar 6, 2007
114
117
Tokens
214
Dirty Money
100
Whitecaps statement that Camilo is under contract and own the his international rights. Queretaro cannot sign him without the rights. Things are looking bad for Camilo, and Queretaro. Maybe just coming out as a selfish POS.

Problem is this whole option-year thing is a big can of worms.
MLS regulations don't hold water by FIFA and International rules in many aspects and this is one of them.
It is not a straightforward case but there are many precedents disregarding national laws and allowing for the move.
The best case was of a couple of Uruguayans transfering to PSG. They were in a 2+2 contracts with little or no salary increase if option was exercised (ring a bell?). Laws in Uruguay strictly allowed for these contracts. Regardless, CAS sided with players and they were deemed to be free agents.
MLS has been lucky in many cases because players generally avoid going for broke but a good agent from outside of North America (Camilo's case) knows that in may cases these clauses are not worth the paper they are printed on.

Good article to read :

http://www.maple-leaf-forever.com/2014/01/06/the-camilo-affair-the-legality-and-the-morality/

We can expect a lot of noise on this and if he goes for free than the floodgates may open (like Bosman ruling).
 

TulioMaravilha

Active Member
Mar 6, 2007
114
117
Tokens
214
Dirty Money
100
WTF, hey Regs, could you delete that stupid attachment from my previous post?
I was posting from work and apparently the damn thing was in my computer's clipboard.

Thanks
 

TulioMaravilha

Active Member
Mar 6, 2007
114
117
Tokens
214
Dirty Money
100
Not that I care but: American lawyer talking about lots of things that apply to American law.
And before anyone asks, no I'm not a lawyer but I have legal training (in Brazil), both my parents are lawyers and around 2 dozen of my immediate family in Brazil (uncles, aunts, cousins and in-laws) practice law.

In any international transfer what is valid are FIFA regulations and, subsidiarily, Switzerland's laws (as FIFA is based there).
FIFA's DRC and CAS have stricken down countless cases where local law supported the option clauses.
CBA, MLS rules, national laws means nothing.
But it's always a case by case thing and the CAS panel COULD side up with MLS (although seems unlikely given their precedents).
There are 2 situations which would be very likely to be upheld by the CAS even if it was an unilateral option: if the player got an early cash bonus to accept the clause or if the contract gave him a big increase should the option been taken. AFAIK neither apply here.
As far as going for the courts with a tort claim what the guy seems to ignore is that FIFA's laws strictly forbid that and a country's FA can get punished including with defiliation if it allows it to happen. Awhile back BRAZIL got that put into the table and our FA was told in no uncertain terms to deal with it ASAP when a major Brazilian team decided to go to the civil courts for a sports related matter.
As I said, American lawyer, may know all there is to know about NFL, NHL, MLB, MLS (internal issues), etc. When it comes to World Football I doubt he knows what's there waiting for him. I could point to a bunch of opinions by people in the know about how FIFA rules work but why bother.
The link I put above is actually very informative and hits the nail on the head.

Now, I don't believe it's going to go anywhere because lawyers and agents prefer settlements over fight. For Camilo to insist on the case he'd have to be really pissed with the Caps, be receiving a bucketload of money to make the gamble worth it AND be certain that the Mexican team would wait to see how this unfolds. IMHO he'll get a payday and get moved out of here soon. But if this were to go forward could screw up the whole structure of contracts in MLS.
 

dezza

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2005
3,857
2,198
Tokens
4,148
Dirty Money
420
Not that I care but: American lawyer talking about lots of things that apply to American law.
In any international transfer what is valid are FIFA regulations and, subsidiarily, Switzerland's laws (as FIFA is based there).
FIFA's DRC and CAS have stricken down countless cases where local law supported the option clauses.
CBA, MLS rules, national laws means nothing.

I don't know where you are getting your information, but FIFA themselves say that the DRC will take into account CBAs that exist. The MLS CBA would be recognized by FIFA and since it allows for option years on contracts they would likely side with MLS.

I can't imagine Swiss law has any bearing on a case like this.

From: http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/aff...98/faq_employment_disputes_club_player_en.pdf

Which Law does the DRC apply?
The DRC applies the FIFA Statutes and regulations whilst taking into account all relevant arrangements, laws and/or collective bargaining agreements that exist at national level, as well as the specificity of sport
 

TulioMaravilha

Active Member
Mar 6, 2007
114
117
Tokens
214
Dirty Money
100
TAS 2005/A/983 & 984 Club Atlético Peñarol c. Carlos Heber Bueno Suarez, Cristian Gabriel Rodriguez Barrotti & Paris Saint-Germain

3. Il faut voir dans la référence au droit suisse à titre supplétif opérée par les Statuts de la
FIFA la volonté de combler toute lacune éventuelle par le renvoi subsidiaire à un
système étatique, par hypothèse plus complet. Toutefois, si les règles de la FIFA
traitent expressément d'une question, il n'y a pas lieu de rechercher une autre solution
éventuelle prévue en droit suisse. L'art. 187 LDIP permet un tel choix, même si c'est
pour déroger à une disposition impérative du droit suisse. Cela étant, la réserve de
l'ordre public demeure. Par conséquent, les règles de la FIFA applicables à titre

6.Le système uruguayen de prolongation unilatérale des contrats est contraire aux
principes fondamentaux du droit suisse du travail. Un tel mécanisme n'a de
contractuel que la forme.

Full text ( désolé, seulement en français ) :)

http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sites/CaseLaw/Shared Documents/983, 984.pdf

Partial Commented review in google books:

CAS and Football: Landmark Cases: Landmark Cases

http://books.google.ca/books?id=0vgC42I_H4MC&pg=PA116&dq=Penarol Suarez Barrotti&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rHXMUo3VII34oAT08oDIDw&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Penarol Suarez Barrotti&f=false
 

Mr Base

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2005
3,340
236
Tokens
137
Dirty Money
100
Capitain Caps can't keep the players forget getting rid of anyb guy. Miller is it this year. I think Solgato if he gets the chance will out score Miller.
God help us. It will take work this year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

No members online now.

Your TTP Wallet

Tokens
0
Dirty Money
0
TTP Dollars
$0
Top