EXPLAINER: How Ademola Lookman can unilaterally terminate his Atalanta contract to force Inter move

Ademola Lookman is currently on strike to force Atalanta's hand into selling him to Atletico Madrid; however, La Dea are refusing to budge.

The 27-year-old Nigerian forward failed to show up in training yesterday, as Pulse Sports reported, and today he removed all his personal belongings from their camp in Zingonia.

The Nigerian currently earns around €1.8 million net annually. That number could take a hit should Atalanta decide to take disciplinary action against Lookman.

According to Calcio e Finanzia, La Dea reserve the right to dock the CAF Player of the Year's pay if he misses three club appointments, provided the appointments are 48 hours apart.

Lookman has yet to miss three, as he began the strike yesterday; however, if this goes on, his stance could eat into his earnings.

Atalanta are not the only one with a legal recourse, as Lassana Diarra’s landmark ruling in 2024 has opened the door for Lookman to unilaterally terminate his contract.

Italian sports agent Andre D’Amico, during a session on Radio Kiss Kiss, explained as follows, “Don’t forget that after the Diarra case, he could also decide to rescind the contract, which would give Atalanta compensation.”

“The abolition of Article 17 on the free circulation of European citizens, because Lookman is a non-EU player, would be exploiting jurisprudential equivalences that equate EU workers with others.”

Lassana Diarra challenged FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), particularly Article 17, which penalised players and new clubs when players terminated contracts unilaterally.

Last year, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in favour of Diarra and other plaintiffs, determining that Article 17 violated EU law, specifically the TFEU Article 45, which guarantees freedoms of movement for workers, and Article 101, which restricts anti-competitive practices.

While Lookman is not regarded as an EU player, Andre D’Amico argues that his lawyers could use something called jurisprudence equivalence.

In 2003, another landmark judicial outcome known as the Kolpak ruling adjudged that non-EU players with certain trade agreements with the EU could work in EU states without counting as “foreigners” for quota purposes.

This created a judicial precedent for non-EU athletes to share similar privileges as their EU counterparts. Given Nigeria's extensive trade agreements with the EU, this means that Lookman’s lawyers could argue that, despite being classified as a non-EU worker, he should be allowed to benefit from the ECJ’s judgement deeming Article 17 illegal, thereby permitting him to unilaterally terminate his contract.

Diarra’s win against FIFA is already being spoken about as having a similar impact on football transfers as the Bosman ruling did. Should Lookman successfully exploit the ruling, transfers as we know them are in for a radical change.