Justice for Players: the collective lawsuit against FIFA post-Diarra

On August 4, 2025, a Dutch foundation called Justice for Players launched what may be the biggest demand in the history of professional sport: a class action against FIFA and five national European federations, representing up to 100,000 footballers — men and women — who played in the EU and the UK since 2002.

The claim: that FIFA’s transfer rules were for more than two decades, which caused systematic economic losses to players, and that it is time for FIFA to pay for it. The estimated amount: billions of euros.

This claim is the direct consequence of the Diarra judgement. If the TJEU determined that the rules were incompatible with EU law, the players who suffered its effects are entitled to compensation. And Justice for Players intends to collect it.

What this article covers

What is Justice for Players and who is behind it
Against whom and why it is sued
The central argument: 8% less revenue for 23 years
Who can participate: opt-out system vs. opt-in
How demand is funded: Deminor’s role
Reactions: FIFPRO, trade unions and the legal world
Possible FIFA defenses
What it means for Latin American players
How to join if you are interested

What is Justice for Players

Justice for Players (JfP) is a Dutch foundation It is not a union or a club — it is a legal vehicle designed to represent the interests of the players concerned in court.

Your directory includes a Lucia Melcherts (Dutch lawyer, president of the foundation), Dolf Segaar (Dutch lawyer, former football professional, former agent and former club manager), and other legal and sports professionals.

What makes this initiative particularly powerful is the legal team that supports it:

Finch Dispute Resolution
Dutch legal study specializing in collective actions in the Netherlands.

Dupont-Hissel
The Belgian study which represented the Lassana Diarra Jean-Louis Dupont and Martin Hissel are the same lawyers who handled the cases Bosman (1995), MeccaMedina (2006), Royal Antwerp (2023), European Super League (2023) and Diarra (2024). Possibly the world's most experienced legal team in European sports law.

Deminor
One of the main providers of dispute financing (litigation financing) of Europe. It finances the demand in full: Players pay nothing. Deminor charges a percentage (reported around 25%) of the compensations that are recovered.

Against whom it is sued

The complaint is brought before the Midden-Nederland District Court (Netherlands), under the Dutch law of collective settlement of mass damage (Wet afwikkeling massasachade in collectieve actie The defendants are:

FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association)
KNVB (Netherlands Football Federation)
FFF (French Football Federation)
DFB (German Football Federation)
URBSFA/KBVB (Belgian Football Federation)
DBU (Danish Football Federation)

Why national federations and not just FIFA? Because the national federations implemented and applied the rules of the RETJ in their territories. In doing so, they were part of the mechanism that restricted the mobility of players. Under European competition law, both the association that adopts the rules (FIFA) and the entities that implement them (the federations) can be responsible for the damages caused.

The central argument: systematic loss of 8%

The demand argument is based on an economic analysis: the RETJ’s illegal rules — in force since 2002 — restricted player mobility and their bargaining power. According to preliminary estimates by economists hired by JfP, this resulted in professional footballers gaining on average a 8 % less of what they would have earned if the rules had been legal.

This percentage does not refer only to players who tried to terminate their contract. The argument is broader: the rules created a systemic effect especially the football labor market. Even players who never terminated a contract were affected, because:

Your negotiating power was limited by the difficulty of going to another club
The clubs knew that the player could not believably threaten to leave, which depressed the wages offered
The system worked, in the words of FIFPRO Europe, as the most significant and durable non-contracting agreement of the sports industry

8% sounds little, but in 23 years and 100,000 players... If you take the average salary of a professional footballer in Europe (which varies enormously according to the league), 8% less during an average 8-year career represents a significant loss. Multiplied by 100,000 players over more than two decades, economists estimate that the total amount of compensation amounts to several billion euros.

Who can participate

The demand uses the Dutch system of collective actions, which has a fundamental particularity:

System	Who applies	How it works
Opt-out	Players who resident in the Netherlands	They're automatically included If they do not want to participate, they must file a declaration of exclusion.
Opt-in	Players who do not reside in the Netherlands	They can join voluntarily to demand through the Justice for Players website (justiceforplayers.com). You must register and sign a participation agreement.

The requirements to participate: be or have been professional player and have played for a club in a EU Member State or United Kingdom at any time since 2002 No matter the nationality of the player or the league in which he played — what matters is that the club was in an EU or UK country.

Important: Registration is free. Deminor covers all legal, expert and operational costs. They don't pay anything. If the claim is successful, Deminor charges a percentage of the amount recovered. If it is unsuccessful, players owe nothing. There is a deadline for 60 days from the signing of the participation agreement to cancel the registration. Afterwards, the participation becomes irrevocable.

Supports: players' unions

Since its launch, Justice for Players has been supported by multiple European players' unions:

VVCS (Association of Hired Players of the Netherlands) — first organization to announce its support
UNFP (National Union of Professional Footballers of France) — joined as co-defendant
Spillerforeningen (SPFO) of Denmark
PFA Ireland (Ireland)
PFA Lithuania (Lithuania)
Finnish Football Players Association
And other European trade unions that continue to join

FIFPRO Europe issued a statement describing the lawsuit as "the anticipated practical response to the Diarra" judgment and recognized "the fundamental right of players to seek justice in what has constituted the most significant and lasting non-hierarchy agreement of the sports industry."

Which rules are questioned (and why since 2002)

The RETJ rules that JfP points out as illegal are the same as the TJU questioned in the Diarra judgment. But the lawsuit extends the claim back in time: since 2002, which is when these provisions were incorporated into the RETJ as a result of the agreement between FIFA, UEFA and the European Commission following the Bosman case.

The four central restrictions that JfP said caused damage to players:

The unlawful criteria for calculating the compensation that the player had to pay if he terminated without just cause
The possibility that the former club federation would block the STI during a contract dispute
The automatic solidarity responsibility of the new club
Disciplinary sanctions against the player and the new club

According to the demand, these combined rules created a general wage suppression: Players could not move freely, which reduced their bargaining power and depressed their income throughout the market.

Possible FIFA defenses

While the Diarra ruling is a strong precedent, FIFA has several possible lines of defence:

Causation
Prove that all players suffered quantifiable damage from the rules questioned is a huge challenge. FIFA could argue that wages depend on many factors (talent, market, individual negotiation) and that regulatory restriction was not the main cause of any specific loss.

Statute of limitations
Some jurisdictions have limitation periods that could limit the temporal scope of the claim. Claiming damages since 2002 may face prescription objections for the older years.

Legitimacy of the rules
FIFA could argue that its rules pursued a legitimate objective (contractual stability, integrity of competitions) and that, until the Diarra judgment, there was a reasonable presumption of legality based on the 2001 agreement with the European Commission.

Experts such as Daniel Gore (from Withers) point out that FIFA is going to have difficulty setting up a robust defence against the EUJ ruling, which was particularly clear and strong in its determination that the rules violated EU law.

Beyond JfP: Individual demands and other forums

Justice for Players' lawsuit is not the only way. Morgan Sports Law and Secretariat Internationalthere are other possibilities:

Individual claims: A player who can prove that he lost a concrete job opportunity by applying RETJ's illegal rules could file an individual lawsuit. This requires proving specific damage (e.g.: "the Club X refused to sign me because he feared solidarity " liability).

Claims before English courts: Players who played in the UK could take action in English courts, although the JfP route in the Netherlands already covers them if they register as opt-in.

Demands from other actors: Not only could players claim. Agents and clubs who suffered quantifiable losses by illegal rules could also have legitimacy to sue.

What it means for Latin American players

If you played in Europe, you can participate. JfP's lawsuit is open to any professional player who has played in an EU or UK club since 2002, regardless of their nationality. If you are Argentine, Brazilian, Colombian, Mexican or any other country and you played at any time in a European club, you can register as opt-in at justiceforplayers.com.

If you played only in clubs outside the EU (for example, only in Argentina, Brazil or Mexico), this specific lawsuit does not cover you — because it is based on the violation of EU law, which applies only within the territory of the Union. However, as the RETJ rules are global, Diarra’s precedent and the eventual reform of the RETJ benefit all players in the world.

How to Join

Steps to Register

Visit justiceforplayers.com
Check that you meet the requirements: professional player + having played in an EU or UK club since 2002
Complete the registration form with your personal data and professional history
Sign the participation agreement (opt-in)
You have 60 days to cancel if you change your mind
You pay nothing: all costs are covered by Deminor

Important: this information is guidance. Before joining any legal action, consult with a lawyer who can evaluate your personal situation.

The panorama: what to expect

JfP's claim is in its early stages before the Midden-Nederland District Court. This type of collective action in the Netherlands usually has a process of years, including admissibility of the claim, determination of liability and quantification of damages.

FIFA has virtually unlimited legal remedies and is going to litigate every point. But JfP has funding from Deminor, with the Dupont-Hissel team (who already won the Diarra case) and with a ruling from the TJUE that already determined that the rules were illegal.

What is certain: this demand will keep the pressure on FIFA so that the RETJ’s long-term reform is genuine, deep and balanced, and so that players — who are, after all, the ones who generate the value in this sport — will get what they deserve.

This guide is based on press releases from Justice for Players (August 2025), Deminor, FIFPRO Europe, BusinessWire, Morgan Sports Law analysis, Secretariat International, Sérvulo & Associados, The Global Legal Post, and the Irish Law. This guidance is informative and does not replace the advice of a specialized lawyer.

If you're building your career in professional football, create your free profile on Football CV.

Justice for Players: the collective lawsuit against FIFA post-Diarra