Skip to main content

Chelsea transfer ban suspended by CAS

Chelsea will now be able to sign players in the forthcoming transfer window.
Chelsea will now be able to sign players in the forthcoming transfer window.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • The Court of Arbitration for Sport has suspended the transfer ban placed on English Premier League side Chelsea
  • The side appealed against the ruling made by football's world governing body FIFA
  • CAS have said until a final decision is made the club will be able to sign new players
  • Gael Kakuta's four-month FIFA-imposed suspension has also been lifted temporarily

(CNN) -- The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has suspended the transfer ban placed on English Premier League side Chelsea after the side appealed against the ruling made by football's world governing body FIFA.

FIFA had previously stated the club would not be able to sign new players until 2011, after they were found to have induced Gael Kakuta to break his contract with French lside Lens.

However, an appeal by the London side to CAS has resulted in the ban being lifted until a final decision is made by the Swiss-based court of appeal.

CAS stated on Friday: "Such sanctions are now stayed until the CAS renders its final decision in this matter."

Kakuta's four-month FIFA-imposed suspension has also been lifted temporarily. CAS are not expected to hear the case until the new year, which should leave Chelsea free to buy players as normal in the January transfer window.

CAS confirmed on October 22 they had received an appeal from Chelsea asking for the ban to be stayed.

Immediately after the decision of FIFA's dispute resolution chamber was made public, the London club made clear their intent to appeal against the ban and compensation payments to Lens of almost one million euros, which they described as "disproportionate".

A statement from the club read: "Chelsea will mount the strongest appeal possible following the decision of FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber over Gael Kakuta.

"The sanctions are without precedent to this level and totally disproportionate to the alleged offence and the financial penalty imposed. We cannot comment further until we receive the full written rationale for this extraordinarily arbitrary decision."