The case involves a dispute between Venezuelan professional football player Ricardo David Páez Gómez and Baniyas Sports Club, along with FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The central issue was whether Páez Gómez breached his contract with Baniyas without just cause by not returning after a loan period with Barcelona Sport Club in Ecuador ended on December 31, 2004, and instead signing with other clubs, including Corporación Deportivo Pereira. The case originated from a complaint filed by Baniyas with FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) in 2006, alleging unauthorized transfer. The DRC ruled in favor of Baniyas in 2009, ordering Páez Gómez to pay USD 162,500 in compensation and imposing a four-month playing restriction, with Pereira jointly liable. Páez Gómez appealed to CAS in 2010, seeking to overturn the decision and lift the sanctions.
The CAS panel addressed procedural and substantive issues. Procedurally, it denied Páez Gómez’s requests for additional document disclosures and new evidence, citing lack of jurisdiction over third parties and absence of exceptional circumstances. Witness testimony was also limited to those previously disclosed. Substantively, the panel emphasized that under FIFA’s Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), loan agreements must be in writing, and the burden of proof lies with the party asserting their validity. Páez Gómez claimed Baniyas authorized his transfers, but the panel found no written agreements or credible evidence to support this. Letters and unsigned documents submitted by Páez Gómez were deemed insufficient to prove consent. The panel noted that Baniyas had requested the return of Páez Gómez’s International Transfer Certificate (ITC) after the loan expired, further undermining his claims.
The panel upheld the DRC’s decision, concluding that Páez Gómez breached his contract without just cause during the protected period. It affirmed the compensation amount and playing restriction, as these were not contested. The appeal was dismissed, and all other relief requests were rejected. The ruling underscored the importance of written agreements in player transfers and strict adherence to contractual obligations. The case highlights the rigorous procedural and evidentiary standards in sports arbitration, as well as the consequences of failing to meet these requirements. The CAS’s decision reinforced FIFA’s regulatory framework, ensuring clubs and players adhere to contractual and transfer rules to maintain fairness and stability in professional football.