Juan Martín Lucero / Fortaleza EC / Colo-Colo & FIFA

Striker Juan Martín Lucero left Chilean club Colo-Colo for Brazilian side Fortaleza EC in January 2023, following a contentious exit Colo-Colo characterised as a unilateral termination of his contract without just cause. Colo-Colo brought a claim before FIFA seeking a four-to-six-month competitive ban on Lucero and USD 2,100,000 in compensation. FIFA initially ruled in Colo-Colo's favour, imposing a four-month period of ineligibility on Lucero and barring Fortaleza from registering new players for two transfer windows.

Both Lucero and Fortaleza appealed to CAS, generating three linked case numbers: Lucero's own appeal, Fortaleza's separate appeal, and Colo-Colo's cross-appeal against both. A hearing was held on 14-15 March 2024. While the case was pending, Fortaleza and Colo-Colo separately discussed a financial settlement to close the dispute, reportedly around USD 2,000,000, approved by Fortaleza's own board as a way to end the matter regardless of the sporting proceedings' outcome. In the meantime, Fortaleza extended Lucero's own contract to the end of 2027, and the striker went on to make 117 appearances for the club with 47 goals and two trophies (the 2023 Campeonato Cearense and 2024 Copa do Nordeste) across two seasons.

On the merits, CAS reversed FIFA's original decision, absolving both Lucero and Fortaleza of the sporting sanctions — the ban and the transfer restriction were overturned. Separately, the panel addressed the parties' private settlement, drawing an important structural distinction between two layers of a football dispute: the "horizontal" layer (the parties' own private financial rights and obligations, which they are free to settle between themselves) and the "vertical" layer (any sporting sanction imposed by a governing body, which sits outside the parties' control and cannot be undone by private agreement alone). The panel ratified the settlement only as to its horizontal, financial elements — meaning Fortaleza still had to complete the agreed compensation payment to Colo-Colo — while expressly excluding one clause (1.2) that attempted to reach into the vertical, sanction-related side of the dispute already resolved on the merits. Costs were allocated separately across the three linked case numbers, largely following which party had originated each appeal.