The case revolves around a dispute between FC Bacau (Appellant) and FC Steaua Bucarest (Respondent) concerning a transfer agreement and its addendum, signed on 30 August 2004, related to a player. The addendum stipulated that if the player's contract with Steaua ended for any reason during the initial five-year period (extended to 2011), Steaua would owe Bacau €800,000. The player's contract expired on 30 June 2011 after he declined a new offer, prompting Bacau to invoice Steaua for the stipulated amount. Steaua refused, arguing the clause only applied to the initial five-year term ending in 2009. Bacau filed a claim with the Romanian Football Federation's Dispute Resolution Commission (DRC), which ruled in Steaua's favor, interpreting the clause as limited to the original term. Bacau appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which upheld the DRC's decision, confirming the €800,000 obligation did not extend beyond the initial period. The CAS also reduced the addendum's excessive 1% daily interest rate to 5% annually under Swiss law.
Bacau further contested procedural fairness, alleging bias due to the DRC president's ties to Steaua's owner. The CAS panel, however, found the contractual terms clear and enforceable, ruling that Steaua was obligated to pay the €800,000 plus VAT and 5% annual interest from 31 July 2011. The panel dismissed Steaua's arguments about ambiguity and public policy, emphasizing the addendum's intent to ensure Bacau's compensation if the player wasn't transferred. Witness testimony supported Bacau's claim that the clause was a safeguard. The final award, issued on 20 August 2012, ordered Steaua to comply with the payment, underscoring the enforceability of contractual terms in sports disputes. The case highlights the complexities of transfer agreements, the role of arbitration in resolving such disputes, and the importance of clear contractual language.