About the database
DRC Database
- All published decisions from the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (as from 2002) in one database
- Easy to find with a professional search engine
- All decisions are summarized, analysed, sorted and ranked
- This transparent and accessible information completes your knowledge of all legal aspects of international football
- By gaining access to this valuable collection of all DRC decisions you have unique and valuable information for your professional purpose. A must have in the sports law industry
- The database is founded by a.o. the author of the book "The jurisprudence of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber" Mr Frans de Weger
- The Asser Institute is one of the highly appreciated partners of the DRC Database
- Access to this valuable information all over the world simply through the internet and your personal account.
Directions for use
General
The editors of DRC Database, summarized, analysed and sorted all decisions of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) published on the website of FIFA. Each decision is divided in several sections, such as Case Number/Name, Date, Headwords, Relevant RSTP article, Summary (subdivided in Facts, Considerations, Decision), Importance rating and a Link to the original document. Please note that summaries are provided by DRC Database and are intended for the use and benefit of regulatory compliance professionals in the judicial services industry.
Searching the Database
When searching the database, just enter any combination of words into the search engine and hit the search button. Use key words of the subject or content of the decision you want to find. The database will swiftly search all DRC Decisions. There is no need to use connection words (OR, AND) or words like ‘the’ and ‘a’. The search engine automatically sorts the results on relevance, based on your search terms. The most relevant decisions automatically appear on the top of the list. If the desired decisions aren’t found you should refine your search instructions. The search results can be sorted on relevance, date and importance rating (given by the authors).
Relevance is guaranteed by the editors, whom have summarized the decisions carefully. Like many other search engines our engine can give more search results than expected. Some of the results can be irrelevant. However, because of the engine’s ability to sort and prioritize the results on relevance, there will be no need to browse through all results, because you can focus on the top part of the results ( just like Google).
Display of the results
It should also be noted that the system has excluded some material words from the search engine. Words like ‘the’, ‘a’ etc. shall not be considered in your search: the system adds no value to these words.
Each decision of the DRC on the website of FIFA is provided with a so-called Case Number. The first number often stands for the month of the year concerned. The second number often stands for the year of the decision. The other numbers of Case Number refer to the number of the case itself. Each decision and search result of the DRC is further provided with a Date, which also speaks for itself.With respect to the Headwords it must be underlined that the editors lifted out the most relevant key words, so-called Headwords. For example, a decision of the DRC related to a just cause for a player is provided with headwords such as “just cause player”. In most decisions the DRC refers to relevant articles of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (also known as RSTP). Be aware that different versions of the RSTP rules exist. Therefore, the editors pointed out which version of the RSTP is applicable by making reference to the specific version. For example, in case article 17 of the RSTP 2005 is applicable to the case at hand, this will be described by the editors as “17 (edition 2005)”.
The main section is the Summary, which is subdivided in Facts, Considerations and Decision. The editors tried to avoid any personal comments within the Summary by following the original facts and considerations of the DRC decision. Personal comments of the editors are solely inserted in the so–called section Commentary. If the editors find the decision important or innovative, the decision is provided with a Commentary. Summaries as from three stars will in general be provided with a Commentary. The Commentary can be provided with information that does not directly refer to the content of the summary itself, but can still be seen as important for other reasons by the editors. Please be further aware that the content in a Commentary is open for interpretation.
Therefore the content of DRC Database is solely meant for general legal guidance only and should not be relied upon as a substitute for specific legal, financial and/or other advice/procedures (for more information, see also the Terms and Conditions that apply to the use of the website and to the use of all information and content on the website of DRC Database). In the section Importance, the editors classified the decision by providing it with number of stars (between * and * * * * *). Finally, each decision is concluded with a link to the original PDF-document of the decision concerned.
DRC Database welcomes general comments and ideas related to the decisions and its summaries. Just send an email to: info@drcdatabase.com.
Abbreviations
| Art. | = | Article |
| MA | = | Member Association |
| RSTP | = | Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players |
| DRC | = | Dispute Resolution Chamber |
| PSC | = | Players’ Status Committee |
| CAS | = | Court of Arbitration for Sport |
| RGAR | = | Regulations Governing the Application of the Regulations |
