Scribd
Upload
38 views3 pages

FENERBAHÇE FUTBOL ANONIM ŞIRKETI AND FENERBAHÇE SPOR KULÜBÜ v. TÜRKİYE

The case involves Fenerbahçe Football Club and Fenerbahçe Sports Club's application to the Turkish Football Federation to recognize nine championships won before 1959 as national league championships, which would increase their total championships and associated revenues. The TFF has not responded to their requests, leading the clubs to claim a violation of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically regarding access to an independent tribunal and property rights. The document outlines the legal questions regarding the compatibility of their complaints with the Convention and the potential violations of their rights.

Uploaded by

emirguney
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
38 views3 pages

FENERBAHÇE FUTBOL ANONIM ŞIRKETI AND FENERBAHÇE SPOR KULÜBÜ v. TÜRKİYE

The case involves Fenerbahçe Football Club and Fenerbahçe Sports Club's application to the Turkish Football Federation to recognize nine championships won before 1959 as national league championships, which would increase their total championships and associated revenues. The TFF has not responded to their requests, leading the clubs to claim a violation of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically regarding access to an independent tribunal and property rights. The document outlines the legal questions regarding the compatibility of their complaints with the Convention and the potential violations of their rights.

Uploaded by

emirguney
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Published on 24 March 2025

SECOND SECTION
Application no. 38961/23
FENERBAHÇE FUTBOL ANONİM ŞİRKETİ and FENERBAHÇE SPOR
KULÜBÜ
against Türkiye
lodged on 27 October 2023
communicated on 5 March 2025

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the nine championships the applicant clubs have
won prior to 1959.
The applicants’ request of 6 March 2021 to the Turkish Football
Federation (“TFF”) to register those championships as “national league
championships” with a view to increasing the first applicant’s total number
of championships to 28, and the number of stars on their team badge to 5, and
to adjust the broadcast revenue distribution accordingly, which would also
entitle them to a compensation of 11,100,000 US dollars plus interest,
representing the broadcast revenue they would have received since 2005 had
their nine championships in question been taken into account, was not
answered. The applicants’ subsequent written pleadings to the TFF also
remained without a clear reply. As a result, on 12 May 2023 the first applicant
brought proceedings before the Arbitration Committee of the TFF in the name
of both applicants, arguing that the TFF’s failure to reply amounted to an
implied rejection of their request of 6 March 2021 and therefore asked the
Arbitration Committee to rule in their favour with respect to their nine
championships won prior to 1959 along with their pecuniary claims with
respect to broadcast revenues.
In a decision of 18 July 2023, the Arbitration Committee rejected the case,
noting that its competence covered decisions of the Board of Directors of the
FENERBAHÇE FUTBOL ANONİM ŞİRKETİ AND FENERBAHÇE SPOR KULÜBÜ v.
TÜRKİYE – SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE AND QUESTIONS

TFF and that it could not decide in the absence of such a decision. It noted
that the Board of Directors had not rendered a decision on the dispute and
that, moreover, the TFF had announced on 15 July 2023 that it had established
a special commission to examine the issue of championships prior to 1959.
The applicants complain under Article 6 of the Convention that they have
no access to an independent and impartial tribunal that could determine their
dispute with the TFF regarding the recognition of their championships prior
to 1959. They submit in this connection that the TFF refuses to render a
decision in respect of their claim and that the Arbitration Committee, which
also refused to examine the dispute, was not independent and impartial. The
applicants further argue that despite the announcement of 15 July 2023, and
until their application with the Court, there is neither an established special
commission within the TFF nor any concrete action undertaken by the latter
in this regard.
Lastly the applicants consider that the championships won prior to 1959
constitute a “possession” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
to the Convention and that therefore their non-recognition by the TFF
deprives them of all the pecuniary and non-pecuniary benefits that are directly
related to the number of championships recognised by the TFF for the
purposes of the Turkish Super League (formerly also known as the Turkish
Premier League). In particular, the applicants argue that the TFF’s decision
to consider 1959 (the date when the Turkish Premier Football League began)
as the cut-off date for the number of national championships won by football
clubs to be arbitrary given that the Turkish Football Federation was
inaugurated in 1923 and national football matches, including away matches,
took place as early as 1924.
They complain in addition under Article 13 of the Convention about the
unavailability of effective domestic remedies to defend their property rights.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Are the applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention


concerning the recognition of their nine championships prior to 1959
compatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention (see, for
general principles, Boulois v. Luxembourg [GC], no. 37575/04, §§ 90-94,
ECHR 2012)?

2. Assuming that Article 6 § 1 is applicable to the dispute in question, has


there been a violation of the applicants’ right of access to an independent and
impartial tribunal within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on

2
FENERBAHÇE FUTBOL ANONİM ŞİRKETİ AND FENERBAHÇE SPOR KULÜBÜ v.
TÜRKİYE – SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE AND QUESTIONS

account of the refusal of the Arbitration Committee of the TFF to examine


the merits of the dispute in question (see Zubac v. Croatia [GC],
no. 40160/12, §§ 76-79, 5 April 2018, and Ali Rıza and Others v. Turkey,
nos. 30226/10 and 4 others, §§ 194-223, 28 January 2020)?

3. Are the applicants’ complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the


Convention compatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the said
Protocol (see generally Kopecký v. Slovakia [GC], no. 44912/98, § 35 (c) and
§§ 45-52, ECHR 2004-IX, and Gratzinger and Gratzingerova v. the Czech
Republic (dec.) [GC], no. 39794/98, § 69, ECHR 2002‑VII)?

4. If so, has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1? In


particular, have the applicants been deprived of their possessions in
accordance with the conditions provided for by law, within the meaning of
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, for general principles, Lekić v. Slovenia
[GC], no. 36480/07, §§ 92-95, 11 December 2018)? In that connection, is
there a regulatory basis for the TFF to determine the year 1959 as the cut-off
date for the purposes of registering the total number of national
championships won by a professional club, which allegedly also directly
affects the number of stars that can be displayed on a club’s badge and the
earnings from the broadcast revenue of football matches?

5. Do the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy


for their complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, as required by Article 13
of the Convention (see, for example, Democracy and Human Rights Resource
Centre and Mustafayev v. Azerbaijan, nos. 74288/14 and 64568/16, §§ 78-
81, 14 October 2021)?

You might also like