The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on January 31, 2008, in the dispute involving Hassan El Mouataz, Sporting Lokeren Oost-Vlaanderen, and the Association Sportive des Forces Armées Royales (ASFAR). The case centered on El Mouataz's unilateral termination of his employment contract with ASFAR without just cause outside the protected period, leading to a breach of contract. The dispute primarily addressed the calculation of compensation, distinguishing between training compensation and termination compensation, as well as clarifying the concepts of loss of opportunity and loss of earnings. The CAS applied Article 17(1) of FIFA's Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and Article 4.2(b) of the "Compensation for the Breach of Contract" document, which allowed for the amortization of costs incurred by ASFAR over the contract's duration to determine the residual value of the remaining period. The ruling also considered the average salary owed by both clubs and noted that exceptional circumstances and Swiss law could influence the compensation amount.
El Mouataz, a Moroccan footballer born in 1981, had signed a five-year contract with ASFAR in 2001, set to expire in 2006. In 2005, he joined Sporting Lokeren under a one-year contract with an option for three additional seasons. ASFAR contested the transfer, claiming El Mouataz was still under contract. FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) ruled in 2005 that El Mouataz had breached his contract without just cause and ordered him and Sporting Lokeren to pay compensation to ASFAR. The DRC initially set this amount at €240,000 in 2006, rejecting ASFAR's claim of €2 million and Sporting Lokeren's proposal of €35,550. The DRC noted that while training compensation was irrelevant due to El Mouataz's age, his formative background added value. El Mouataz and Sporting Lokeren appealed to the CAS in 2007, seeking to reduce the compensation to €33,524, while ASFAR filed a counterclaim demanding €1,000,000.
The CAS confirmed its jurisdiction under Article R47 of the Code of Sports-Related Arbitration, as FIFA's statutes recognize CAS as the final arbiter for such disputes. The proceedings were governed by the 2005 FIFA Regulations and Swiss law. The hearing, held on November 26, 2007, focused on determining the appropriate compensation for ASFAR, as the breach of contract was uncontested. The CAS examined El Mouataz's earnings at both clubs: at ASFAR, he received a signing bonus of €4,425, an annual salary of €3,174, and match bonuses, while at Sporting Lokeren, he earned €60,000 annually, variable bonuses, a signing bonus of €15,000 (with an additional €50,000 if his option was exercised), and other benefits. The CAS found aggravating circumstances, including bad faith on the part of Sporting Lokeren, which knowingly pursued El Mouataz despite being informed of his existing contract with ASFAR. The club also violated FIFA rules by not contacting ASFAR before negotiating with the player. Due to these exceptional circumstances, the CAS applied a coefficient of 2.5 to the initial compensation of €45,969, resulting in a final award of €114,922 to be paid jointly by El Mouataz and Sporting Lokeren to ASFAR.
The CAS ruled that interest at a rate of 5% per annum would apply from March 15, 2006, the date ASFAR first formally claimed compensation. However, the CAS rejected ASFAR's claims for additional damages, including loss of opportunity to negotiate a transfer fee and sporting and commercial damages, citing insufficient evidence. The court also dismissed ASFAR's request for training compensation, as El Mouataz was over 23 years old at the time of the transfer. The final ruling partially upheld the appeal by El Mouataz and Sporting Lokeren while rejecting ASFAR's counterclaims. The decision emphasized the distinction between different types of damages under Swiss law and FIFA regulations, clarifying that training compensation and breach-of-contract compensation are separate mechanisms. The ruling underscores the importance of legal certainty and adherence to contractual and regulatory frameworks in resolving sports-related disputes.