The core of a recent dispute between two underage players and a football club was which provisions prevail—those of Israel’s Sports Law or those of a contract?
Two U-15 players filed a request to the Israel Football Association (basing their request on the provisions of the Sports Law, 1988) to be transferred to another club, despite having a valid contract with Maccabi Netanya FC.
Both players claimed, via their representative, that the Sports Law, which allows U-15 players to transfer without (almost) any limitations or required compensation, is cogent and cannot be revoked or conditioned.
It is important to mention that the players and their legal guardians validly signed the contracts with the club.
Our firm represented Maccabi Netanya in the case, claiming that the provisions of the Sports Law override a contract’s provisions only in cases where the contract is silent and the rights of the minor may be harmed.
After a hearing at the Israel Football Association’s Arbitration Institute, Maccabi Netanya’s claims concerning the relations between the Sports Law and a contract’s provisions were accepted in full.
In other words, a precedent was set. The arbitrator’s decision stipulated as follows: a contract may and will prevail over the provisions of the Sports Law, if and when said contract is not silent in whatsoever matter (and of course is not against public policy).
The operative outcome was that although the minors ultimately were allowed to transfer clubs (in order to prevent them any mental anguish) they had to compensate Maccabi Netanya, despite the Sports Law’s stipulation that U-15 players can change clubs without paying any compensation.
For the full article, click here