The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on 31 January 2014 in the dispute between Greek football club PAE Levadiakos and professional player Yero Dia, stemming from the termination of their employment contract. The case originated from a 2007 agreement and subsequent contract, which outlined the player’s salary, bonuses, and housing. Disputes arose when Dia left for France in 2008, claiming unpaid salaries, while Levadiakos accused him of unauthorized departure. Dia later joined French club Wasquehal in 2009 and requested a discharge letter from Levadiakos, asserting his contract was void due to unpaid wages. The club demanded compensation, leading to a FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) ruling in 2012 that ordered Levadiakos to pay Dia EUR 32,000 in unpaid salaries and EUR 77,890 in compensation. Levadiakos appealed to CAS, contesting the decision.
The CAS panel, composed of arbitrators from Portugal, Spain, and Albania, examined procedural and substantive issues, including the validity of Dia’s initial claim, the applicable law, and the evidence of payments. Levadiakos argued that Greek law governed the contract and that Dia’s claim was procedurally flawed and time-barred. The panel, however, determined that FIFA regulations and Swiss law applied, as the parties had agreed to abide by football governing bodies’ rules. It found Dia’s claim admissible, filed within the two-year limitation period, and rejected Levadiakos’ procedural objections.
On the merits, the panel assessed whether the Private Agreement or the Employment Agreement governed the relationship, concluding the latter replaced the former. It scrutinized payment evidence, confirming Dia received EUR 22,500 of the EUR 40,290 owed for the 2007-2008 season, leaving EUR 17,790 unpaid. The panel emphasized Levadiakos’ failure to prove certain payments, particularly a disputed EUR 12,700 cash transaction, while validating a EUR 4,500 bank transfer. Regarding contract termination, the panel noted Levadiakos’ actions—such as restricting Dia’s access to housing and removing him from the team—demonstrated disengagement, but Dia’s lack of formal termination notice meant neither party was entitled to compensation for breach.
The CAS partially upheld the FIFA decision, ordering Levadiakos to pay Dia EUR 17,790 with 5% annual interest, dismissing all other claims. The ruling underscored the importance of formal communication in contractual disputes and the mutual responsibilities of clubs and players. It reinforced FIFA’s role in enforcing contractual fairness and procedural compliance in football employment disputes. The case highlighted the complexities of payment disputes and the necessity of clear documentation to resolve such conflicts. The final decision balanced the financial obligations of the club with the player’s entitlements, providing a resolution grounded in contractual and regulatory principles.