The case CAS 2011/A/2375 involves a dispute between FK DAC 1904, a Slovakian football club, and Zoltan Vasas, a Hungarian professional football player, concerning the termination of an employment contract. The dispute was initially heard by the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (FIFA DRC) before being appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The core issues revolved around the validity of the employment contract, the jurisdiction of FIFA DRC, the player's professional status, and whether the club had just cause for terminating the contract. The employment contract, signed on 15 July 2008, stipulated payments totaling EUR 33,600 net and was valid until 31 May 2009. The player participated in matches for the club but later claimed the club unilaterally terminated the contract by excluding him from training and failing to pay his salary. The FIFA DRC partially accepted the player's claims, ordering the club to pay outstanding remuneration of EUR 9,700, default interest, and EUR 19,200 as compensation for breach of contract.
The club appealed to CAS, arguing that the FIFA DRC lacked jurisdiction, that no valid professional contract existed due to the player's lack of registration with the Slovak Football Association (SFA), and that the contract was unenforceable without the club president's signature. The club also contended that the contract was terminated by mutual consent on 31 October 2008 when the player requested a release to join another club in Hungary. The player did not file a timely response to the appeal, citing communication issues, but was allowed to attend the hearing and comment on the club's submissions. The CAS Sole Arbitrator rejected the club's jurisdictional argument, noting that the club had participated in FIFA proceedings without objection, thereby accepting FIFA DRC's jurisdiction under the principle of venire contra factum proprium. The Arbitrator also dismissed the club's claim about the contract's validity, emphasizing that essential terms like parties, duration, and remuneration were present, making the contract enforceable regardless of registration or the president's signature.
The Arbitrator confirmed the player's professional status, as his salary exceeded the minimum threshold, and found the club in breach of contract for failing to pay the player's salary for three months. The player had repeatedly requested payment before terminating the contract on 25 November 2008 and submitting the matter to FIFA. The Arbitrator ruled that the club's non-payment constituted a fundamental breach, justifying the player's termination with just cause. The CAS upheld the FIFA DRC's decision, ordering the club to pay the outstanding remuneration and compensation. The case highlights the importance of contractual adherence in football employment disputes and the role of CAS in ensuring consistent application of FIFA regulations and Swiss law. The decision reinforces that clubs cannot evade contractual responsibilities by later disputing jurisdiction or contract validity after previously acknowledging them. It also underscores the necessity for employees to formally warn employers of breaches before taking legal action. The CAS's ruling affirmed the player's rights and dismissed the club's appeal, emphasizing the consequences of failing to meet contractual obligations.