CAS Award in ACB 1904 SA v. THE SWISS FOOTBALL LEAGUE

By Sara Botti, Head of the Italian Law Practice, Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich, Switzerland

The recent Award by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in the dispute between AC Bellinzona 1904 SA and the Swiss Football League (SFL) (2024/A/10916) offers an interesting opportunity to reflect on the rigid application of rules regarding "locally trained" football players and the legal implications of their interpretation and application.

The Award, issued on 28 February 2025 and just published on the CAS website at ‘https://www.tas-cas.org/en/jurisprudence/recent-decisions.html’, confirms the automatic nature of sanctions for violating the maximum limit of "non-locally trained" football players, highlighting the importance of legal certainty in sports justice.

The Regulatory Context and the Facts of the Case

Articles 168 and 170 of the Regulations of the Swiss Football Association (ASF) stipulate that, in official competitions, Challenge League teams may register a maximum of seven "non-locally trained" players on the official match sheet.

In the present case, the Swiss Football League found that AC Bellinzona 1904 SA (Bellinzona), which plays in the Swiss Challenge League, had violated these Regulations during the match, played on 20 July 2024, against FC Wil 1900, having registered eight "non-locally trained" players on the match sheet.

The Swiss Challenge League is the Second Football Division in Switzerland.

Bellinzona challenged the decision, arguing that:

• two of the contested players should be considered "locally trained";
• the registration of one player was a material error, as the player was no longer available to the team;
• the absence of an Italian version of the ASF Regulations created interpretative ambiguities, violating the principle of proportionality.

However, on 16 September 2024, the SFL Appeals Tribunal fully upheld the disciplinary decision, highlighting the lack of discretion in the application of the sanction.

The CAS Appeal Proceedings

On 4 September 2024, Bellinzona appealed to the CAS, seeking the annulment of the Appeals Tribunal's decision and the granting of suspensive effect. However, the CAS rejected the precautionary request, finding that there was no irreparable harm, if not granted

Following a hearing, held on 17 February 2025, the CAS, with an award issued on 28 February 2025, dismissed the appeal and fully upheld the SFL decision.

The CAS Reasoning

The CAS based its decision on several key points:

1. The Interpretation of the Rule on "Locally Trained" Players

Article 168 of the ASF Regulations defines a "locally trained" player as one who has spent three full seasons or 36 months at a club affiliated with the ASF between the ages of fifteen and twenty-one. Bellinzona contested the application of this requirement, arguing that the age clause referred only to the 36 months and not to the three full seasons. However, the CAS rejected this interpretation, stating that the purpose of the rule is to encourage the development of young Swiss football players.

1. The regulatory text, both in the German and French versions, clearly extends the age limit to both conditions provided.

Consequently, the players included did not meet the requirements to be considered "locally trained," effectively bringing the number of "non-locally trained" players on the match sheet to eight.

1. The Error in Player Registration

Bellinzona argued that a player had been mistakenly included on the match sheet and that, having already signed a transfer agreement with a Mexican club, he was no longer available to the team. However, the CAS reiterated that, according to Article 15 of the SFL Player Qualification Regulations, a player remains formally registered until the transfer is officially recorded in the federative transfer system. Since the transfer was registered only ten days after the match, he was still eligible to be fielded and thus countable for the purposes of the rule on "locally trained" players.

Moreover, the ASF Disciplinary Regulations stipulate that regulatory violations are punishable whether committed intentionally or negligently. Therefore, the material error in player registration does not exempt the club from responsibility.

4. The Automatic Nature of the Sanction

Article 176 of the ASF Regulations expressly provides that violation of the rule on "locally trained" players automatically results in a forfeit loss (0-3) and a monetary penalty. The CAS, therefore, excluded any discretion in the application of the penalty.

Conclusions

The CAS Award in the Bellinzona case highlights several crucial aspects of sports justice:

• The importance of legal certainty, with clear and rigidly applied rules.
• The absence of any discretionary margin in applying certain sports sanctions.
• The rigidity of the principle of strict liability, which imposes a high level of attention on sports clubs in the administrative management of registered players.

Whilst understanding the interpretative difficulties raised by Bellinzona, the CAS correctly reiterated that sports federations enjoy broad autonomy in regulating competitions and that the rules, once accepted by affiliated clubs, must be respected.

This is in line, therefore, with a jurisprudential trend favouring the rigorous application of sports’ regulatory norms, with the aim of ensuring uniformity, predictability, and sporting integrity.

Sara Botti may be contacted by e-mail at ‘This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.’