The case involves a legal dispute between Dennis Lachter, a licensed football agent registered with the Israeli Football Association (IFA), and Derek Boateng Owusu, a Ghanaian football player who played for clubs in Israel and Spain. The conflict arose from a 2006 representation contract granting Lachter exclusive rights to represent Boateng Owusu, including commission fees based on the player's salary and sponsorship earnings. The contract included a dispute resolution clause referring to FIFA regulations and arbitration. When Boateng Owusu transferred to Beitar Jerusalem FC in 2006, Lachter claimed unpaid commission fees and pursued legal action through an interim attachment order in an Israeli court, later filing a claim with FIFA's Players' Status Committee (FIFA-PSC). Simultaneously, Boateng Owusu initiated arbitration with the IFA Arbitration Institute, seeking a declaration that he owed Lachter nothing. The IFA arbitrator ruled in favor of Boateng Owusu in October 2007, stating Lachter had no active role in the transfer and was not entitled to commission. Lachter appealed this decision in Israeli courts, but both the District Court and Supreme Court upheld the IFA arbitrator's jurisdiction and award. Meanwhile, the FIFA-PSC dismissed Lachter's claim in June 2009, citing insufficient evidence of his involvement in the player's contract and deeming the commission percentage abusive. Lachter then appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in April 2010, challenging the FIFA-PSC decision.
The CAS addressed key procedural issues, including lis pendens (parallel proceedings) and res judicata (finality of judgments). It ruled that once a parallel case concludes with a final award, the issue of lis pendens becomes irrelevant, shifting focus to res judicata. The CAS emphasized that res judicata is a fundamental principle of Swiss procedural law, applicable if a foreign judgment meets the "triple identity" test (same subject matter, legal grounds, and parties) and is recognizable in Switzerland. The CAS recognized the IFA Arbitration Institute as administering genuine arbitral proceedings under Israeli law, capable of producing enforceable awards under the New York Convention. It clarified that jurisdictional issues should be determined based on when a dispute arises, not when the contract was signed, and upheld the validity of arbitration clauses in sports association statutes, noting that registration with a federation implies agreement to its rules.
The CAS examined whether the IFA arbitral award should be recognized in Switzerland under the New York Convention, concluding that the proceedings were genuine arbitration and the award was enforceable. It rejected Lachter's argument that the IFA Arbitrator lacked jurisdiction, noting the contract's dispute resolution clause was non-exclusive and conditional on FIFA regulations, which mandated national disputes be resolved by the relevant federation. The Panel also dismissed Lachter's claim that a 2008 letter from Boateng Owusu acknowledging debt invalidated the arbitral award, as the letter did not mention the award or waive its binding effect. The CAS ultimately upheld the IFA arbitral award as res judicata, preventing it from adjudicating the dispute on its merits and dismissing Lachter's appeal. The decision underscores the importance of respecting final arbitral awards and adhering to contractual and regulatory frameworks in sports disputes.