The case involves a dispute between SC FC Unirea 2006 SA, a Romanian football club, and Nenad Pavlovic, a Serbian professional football player, concerning alleged breaches of an employment contract. The arbitration was conducted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), with Mr. Mark Hovell as the sole arbitrator. The central issues revolved around the validity and interpretation of the employment contract, the applicable law, and the consequences of the contract's non-registration with the Romanian Football Federation (RFF) or the Romanian Professional League. The tribunal determined that FIFA regulations and Swiss law applied, as no express choice of law was made in the contract. Swiss law, particularly Article 187(2) of the Swiss Private International Law Act, was deemed relevant, excluding other national laws.
The dispute originated from a contract signed on 4 February 2005 between Pavlovic and FC Apulum Unirea (the Original Club), which later ceased operations. SC FC Unirea 2006 SA, the Appellant, was formed as its successor and assumed the Original Club's debts, including contractual obligations. Pavlovic claimed unpaid salaries and bonuses totaling USD 20,500 under the contract, arguing it was dissolved due to non-payment, freeing him to leave. FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) examined the case and confirmed its jurisdiction under the 2005 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and DRC. The DRC found the Appellant liable for the Original Club's debts, recognizing the employment contract's existence and upholding Pavlovic's claim for unpaid wages.
The Appellant challenged the DRC’s decision, arguing the contract was void under Romanian law due to non-registration with the RFF. They also questioned the contract's authenticity, claiming Pavlovic never signed a formal agreement due to unresolved visa issues. Pavlovic countered that the contract was valid and the Original Club was responsible for obtaining his work visa. The CAS sought clarification from the RFF, which confirmed that while registration was mandatory, non-registration did not automatically invalidate the contract under Swiss law, which governed the arbitration. The Sole Arbitrator emphasized interpreting the contract based on the parties' mutual intent, guided by principles of good faith.
The CAS upheld the DRC’s decision, ruling that the contract was signed by the Original Club and that non-registration did not render it void. The Appellant, as the successor to the Original Club, was held responsible for the contractual debts. The tribunal ordered the Appellant to pay Pavlovic USD 12,800 plus interest at 5% per annum from 5 August 2007, dismissing all other claims. The case underscores the importance of adhering to contractual obligations in football employment disputes and highlights the role of FIFA and CAS in resolving such conflicts, particularly when regulatory compliance and contractual validity are at odds. The decision reaffirmed that contractual obligations remain enforceable despite procedural lapses in registration.