Hendra Wijaya
European football’s governing body, UEFA, has formally petitioned a United States federal court to reject an attempt by FIFA’s American subsidiaries to intervene in a high-stakes discovery dispute. The legal maneuver is part of UEFA’s ongoing effort to obtain sensitive corporate documents and depositions related to an abandoned proposal by FIFA President Gianni Infantino to privatize a portion of World Cup commercial rights.
In a legal submission presented late Thursday in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, UEFA argued that two domestic entities, FIFA (Americas) Inc and FWC2026 US Inc, are improperly attempting to serve as legal proxies for FIFA and Infantino. UEFA noted that neither the world governing body itself, which is based in Switzerland, nor Infantino has personally moved to formally join the New York proceeding.
The contested discovery application, filed under a US statute governing foreign legal assistance known as Section 1782, targets New York-based venture capital firm Thrive Capital Management and its founder, Joshua Kushner. UEFA asserts that Kushner and his firm may possess crucial communications, financial models, and operational records regarding the defunct project referred to as the FIFA Forward Enterprise transaction.
Under that controversial initiative, Infantino had explored selling a perpetual commercial and operational stake in FIFA’s flagship men’s World Cup alongside other major international tournaments to private financial investors. The blueprint faced intense condemnation across the global sporting landscape, prompting Infantino to formally shelve the proposal on August 1 following an escalating backlash from continental confederations, national federations, and external critics.
UEFA has openly stated that it is evaluating the submission of a formal criminal complaint with judicial authorities in Switzerland. The potential complaint would allege criminal mismanagement against Infantino and potentially other senior FIFA executives involved in negotiating the commercial rights venture. At present, no formal criminal charges have been filed against Infantino or FIFA, and both the organization and its president maintain that no laws or internal statutes were breached.
The cross-border legal battle has further deteriorated the already fraught relationship between global football’s two most powerful governing bodies. FIFA responded sharply to UEFA’s US legal filings last week, characterizing the discovery offensive as an orchestrated smear campaign designed to damage the reputation of the organization and weaken Infantino’s leadership through an unwarranted fishing expedition.
In its latest filing, UEFA dismissed the standing of the American subsidiaries, emphasizing that neither US entity has any direct legal stake in the Manhattan discovery case. UEFA highlighted that the subsidiaries are not subjects of the contemplated Swiss criminal investigation, nor are they the intended recipients of the subpoenas, which are directed exclusively at Thrive Capital and Joshua Kushner.
Furthermore, UEFA contended that any confidentiality interests cited by the US-based subsidiaries in their motion to intervene belong solely to their Swiss parent organization, FIFA. UEFA maintained that the subsidiaries cannot assert proprietary rights or confidentiality privileges on behalf of a parent corporation that has deliberately avoided submitting itself directly to the jurisdiction of the Manhattan federal court.
UEFA also pointed out that Thrive Capital and Joshua Kushner are fully represented by their own legal counsel, who maintain the statutory right to challenge the scope, burden, or validity of any subpoenas after they are officially served. Kushner, whose brother Jared Kushner is the son-in-law of former US President Donald Trump, has not publicly responded to requests for comment regarding his firm's alleged involvement in the transaction discussions.
From a procedural standpoint, UEFA argued that allowing third-party subsidiaries to inject themselves into the litigation before the court determines the fundamental merits of the Section 1782 petition violates standard judicial practice. Typically, federal discovery requests for foreign proceedings are evaluated without preliminary intervention and are subsequently tested through standard motions to quash once subpoenas have been issued.
UEFA cautioned the Manhattan court that granting the subsidiaries’ request to intervene would introduce unnecessary procedural delays. The governing body argued that allowing intervention would trigger an additional, duplicative round of merits briefings, thereby stalling UEFA’s efforts to secure relevant testimony and documentary evidence for its potential Swiss filing in a timely manner.
The Manhattan federal court has yet to issue a definitive ruling on UEFA’s underlying application to serve subpoenas on Thrive Capital and Kushner, nor has it decided whether to grant the intervention petition filed by FIFA’s US entities. The legal confrontation unfolds against a critical political backdrop, as Infantino prepares to mount a campaign for a fourth consecutive term as FIFA president in elections scheduled for March 2027.
Comments (0)