The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled on a dispute between PFC CSKA Sofia and football agent Loïc Bensaïd regarding the validity of a mediation contract and the payment of a commission for securing a player's employment contract. The case originated from a 2010 agreement where Bensaïd facilitated the transfer of a player to CSKA Sofia, entitling him to a commission of EUR 130,000. The club paid only EUR 20,000, leading to legal action. Bensaïd filed a claim with FIFA's Players' Status Committee, which ruled in his favor, ordering the club to pay the remaining EUR 110,000 plus interest. CSKA Sofia appealed to CAS, arguing the contract was invalid due to alleged violations of FIFA regulations and national laws, including dual representation and failure to register the contract with the French Football Federation.
The CAS panel, led by sole arbitrator Manfred Nan, upheld the validity of the mediation contract, emphasizing that FIFA Players’ Agents Regulations (PAR) govern international agency contracts, not national laws. While agents must comply with national regulations, violations typically result in disciplinary actions rather than contract invalidation. The arbitrator noted the club was aware of Bensaïd's dual representation when signing the contract and could not later claim it was void. The panel also dismissed the club's argument that the contract violated Swiss law, as no evidence of fraud or immorality was found. However, the arbitrator reduced the agent's claim from EUR 110,000 to EUR 70,000, citing a unilateral renouncement of EUR 40,000 by Bensaïd's legal representative in a 2010 letter. The CAS awarded Bensaïd EUR 70,000 plus 5% annual interest from 4 August 2010 until payment, adjusting the interest start date from the FIFA decision's original 18 July 2012.
The ruling reinforced principles of good faith and pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept), underscoring that parties must honor valid contracts unless exceptional circumstances like fraud are proven. The decision highlighted the importance of transparency and due diligence in football transactions, prioritizing FIFA regulations over national laws in international disputes. The CAS partially upheld the club's appeal, affirming the contract's validity but reducing the owed amount, and dismissed all other claims by both parties. The club was ordered to comply with the payment terms outlined in the final award.