“The fact that the CSD rules in favor of Barca in the ‘Olm case’ is an intervention”

Looking to exhaust all possible options to be able to register Dani Olm and Pau Viktor Barca eventually going Higher Sports Council (CSD) after the refusal of the Commercial Court No. 10 of Barcelona and the Court of First Instance.

The agency, which depends on the government, granted the highly cautionary request made by Barca, because it believes that the procedure has legal basis. The club’s argument, consisting of 52 pages and 60 attached documents, led the CSD to give immediate temporary registrationbut the procedure will not be finally decided for three months.

SPANISH spoke with Antonio Benitez, managing partner of Administrativando Abogados, a firm specializing in sports law, who analyzed judicially the ones that Barca faced to get Dani Olm and Pau Victor’s precautions.

What is the process for petitioning for precautionary measures to register a player?

The purpose of the precautionary measures is to ensure the effectiveness of the law and to prevent the final decision of the procedure from revealing its effects due to the passage of time. In this case, the precautionary measure presented to the Commercial Court against negative decisions by the Professional League involved the temporary registration of the player pending the resolution of the claim, because if it was not, then at the time of the judgment, time would have passed without the player rendering services to his club, which would cause irreparable damage to the club.

Precautionary measures are upheld when there is an impression that Barca is right on the merits of the case, which was not the case here in both the civil and commercial proceedings because the precautionary measure was refused

Is it possible that the participation of LaLiga and some clubs, such as Atlético de Madrid, Sevilla and Athletic Club, in this procedure could have determined the decision of the commercial court? After all, this is the same judge who in 2023 imposed restraint measures against Gavi in ​​the same case.

In principle, this should not predetermine one issue over another, although the entry of additional actors may have had an effect. I do not dare to say, because of LaLiga or because of other positions, because I do not know the case deeply, but it would not be surprising if in one case they considered it, and in the other – not. Although it is illogical, it is common.

Does Barca have reason to complain? According to their defense, they submitted all the documentation on time…

After the commercial court rejected the precautionary measure, FC Barcelona began a different strategy to register the player after December 31, when his license expired. For this, based on the rules that ensure the financial balance of football clubs (Financial Fair Play), he claimed that he would receive funds in exchange for the sale of Camp Nou VIP boxes to Saudi investors. But the funds arrived only on January 3, when the player’s license had already expired.

The club refers to force majeure in that the funds were not transferred on time, but in our opinion, this claim is not valid. Force majeure according to the Civil Code is an absolutely unpredictable and unavoidable event, even if it is known that it will happen. Barca should have known a long time ago that they had to make the funds on time and what the consequences would be if they didn’t, and they should have acted to prevent this from happening. Barca already knew they had to have money available to the Liga on December 31 to be able to renew the player.

It is not a matter of force majeure, but of imprudence on the part of Barca, because it did not agree with the Qatari investors that the money should have arrived by December 31.

Is it common for CSD to be approached for such cases?

Sports federations are private associations under the supervision of the Supreme Council for Sports, which is an autonomous body subject to administrative law. Decisions by federations on disciplinary matters, such as sanctions against players, once the federal route has been exhausted, can be appealed to the Administrative Sports Court.

As this matter with Olmo’s registration is not disciplinary, but rather affects competition, it is decided by the CSD itself. And against his consent, a controversial-administrative way is opened.

Can CSD “contend” LaLiga and RFEF?

In theory, the CSD could naturally grant the club’s appeal and, accordingly, overturn the Federation’s decisions by approving the player’s registration from January 1. But it would be very surprising that in such a high-profile case and when the League and the Federation agree, the CSD ignores such structures, which are the ones who control and guarantee the integrity of the competition. In such a case, it could be interpreted as the intervention of the authorities in a sporting competition, changing its rules and giving an advantage to one of the participants, whose actions could not have been more negligent.

What can Barca hold on to when CSD is up against them?

What Barca has against it is a precautionary measure, but it does not have a decision on the merits of the case. “Barca” has not exhausted the judicial way with a complaint to the Economic Court and a complaint to the Court of First Instance, these are precautionary measures, but the main sentence has not yet been issued.

The decision of the CSD can be appealed in the disputed administrative jurisdiction and request a new warning or a very warning, that is, there will be three judicial ways. The process is not over, only the precautionary measure is over.