The case involves a dispute between Egyptian professional football player S., Zamalek Sporting Club (Zamalek), PAOK Football Club (PAOK), and FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in 2008. The central issues revolved around the unilateral termination of an employment contract, late payments, impossibility of performance, compensation for damages, and sporting sanctions. The player had signed a contract with PAOK in 2005, but Zamalek contested this, claiming the player was still under contract with them. FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) ruled that the player had breached his contract with Zamalek without just cause, ordering him to pay USD 250,000 in compensation, with PAOK jointly liable if the amount was not paid. The player was also banned from official matches for four months.
The player later amended his contract with PAOK, adjusting payment terms. However, in 2006, he traveled to Egypt for a holiday and was subsequently called for mandatory military service, preventing his return to Greece. PAOK suspended his contract, and the player sought to terminate it on grounds of force majeure, though he later withdrew this request. The player then attempted to play for Zamalek, leading to further legal disputes. The CAS addressed several key legal questions, ruling that the player had no just cause to terminate his contract with PAOK due to late payments, as he had not previously complained. It also rejected the impossibility of performance defense, as the player knew of his military obligations but chose to visit Egypt. The panel upheld the DRC's decision, emphasizing that the player's actions constituted a breach of contract without just cause.
The case highlights the complexities of international football contracts and the role of CAS in resolving disputes. The player's attempt to terminate his contract with PAOK due to military service was dismissed, as he had foreseen the obligation. The CAS upheld the DRC's decision, reinforcing contractual obligations in football and the limited applicability of force majeure in cases where the player could foresee the impediment. The ruling also clarified that matches between national teams were deemed official under FIFA regulations.
The appeal filed by the player and Zamalek was dismissed, and the counterclaim submitted by PAOK was withdrawn. The original decision made by FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber was upheld, maintaining the validity of the initial ruling without further adjustments. The case underscores the importance of adhering to contractual obligations and procedural rules in sports disputes, as well as the consequences of unilateral termination without proper justification. The Panel's decision emphasized the need for clear justification when terminating employment agreements in professional football and the role of governing bodies in resolving such disputes.