La CEJ doit rendre un deuxième jugement décisif pour le monde du football[en] 

The Royal Sporting Charleroi F.C and G-14, the group of Europe's 18 most powerful football clubs, filed a case against the International Football Federation (FIFA) before the Charleroi Commercial Court (Belgium) on 20 March 2006. 

The clubs accuse football's world ruling body of "unlawful use of club players in national teams". The Belgian club Royal Sporting Charleroi F.C filed the case after one of its players, Abdelmajid Oulmers, was hurt playing on national duty for Morocco in 2004. G-14 and Royal Charleroi want the current FIFA rules on the compulsory release of players for international matches judged illegal or amended through a dialogue with the clubs.

The G-14 is also asking for 860 million euro in damages from FIFA for the costs incurred, over the past ten years, of putting players at FIFA's disposal to play in national teams and their subsequent unavailability if they suffer injury.

The last major football case in the European Court of Justice, the 'Bosman ruling ' in 1995, gave professional football clubs' players the right to a free transfer at the end of their contracts.

The Belgian Commercial Court of Charleroi decided , on 15 May 2006, to reject the G-14 demand, on behalf of its members, for 860 million euros in damages from FIFA.  

As to the question of the fundamental legality of FIFA's rule on releasing players, the Charleroi Court decided to refer the case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ ) for a decision as, according to the judgement, existing jurisprudence is not applicable to the case and a new interpretation is of general interest for the uniform application of the Community law through the EU.

The ECJ is thus now set to rule on whether the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players complies with the Treaty of Rome , specifically article 39 (Free movement of workers) and article 49 (Free movement of services) and whether the FIFA rules governing player release and insurance are an abuse of dominant position under articles 81 and 82 (Rules on competition) of the EU Treaty. 

The decision to refer the case to ECJ was requested by G-14 and Royal Sporting Charleroi F.C as part of their legal submissions, where they claim the FIFA statutes governing player release and insurance are an abuse of dominant position under articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty of Rome. It thus wants the current FIFA rules on the compulsory release of players for international matches judged illegal or amended through a dialogue with the clubs. 

The fact that the case is now referred to the ECJ might relaunch negotiations and dialogue between the G-14 clubs and FIFA.

FIFA expressed satisfaction with the Charleroi court's decision to reject the G-14's claim [for the 860 million euro] compensation made on behalf of its members. In its previous statements, FIFA has said that it "expects the legal dispute to be protracted, especially if the EU' legal bodies are drawn into considering the regulation regarding the release of players". FIFA says that UEFA, four other confederations and 48 European associations support it. 

G-14 statement says that it "has long campaigned for the rights of clubs to be more fully recognized at an international level. G-14 believes the existing structure, which prohibits clubs from any direct representation in the decision making process, even on issues where clubs are directly affected, is out of date and unfair". 

"Excluding the clubs from the decision making process when their interests are at stake is not only wrong politically, it is also legally an abuse of dominant position. Now, this fundamental issue will be judged by the European Court of Justice," said G-14's lead counsel, Jean-Louis Dupont.

National football associations affiliated to FIFA tend to take FIFA's stand on the issue as it supports the associations financially and logistically through various programs and grants them a number of rights and privileges. If FIFA needed to pay the big clubs compensations, the grass root organisations would suffer from reduced financing.