The case involves a legal dispute between Polish football club KS Lechia Gdańsk and professional footballer Bedi Buval regarding the termination of an employment contract. The contract, signed on 31 August 2010, was set to expire on 30 June 2012 and included salary and bonus provisions for the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 seasons. Buval played for the club during the 2010-2011 season and received his salary until June 2011. However, in June 2011, the club informed Buval he could no longer train with the first or reserve teams without providing an explanation. The club also presented an appendix allegedly signed by Buval on 15 April 2011, which purported to terminate the contract by 30 June 2011. Buval denied signing this document, claiming he had no reason to terminate the contract and was not in Gdańsk on the alleged signing date.
After negotiations, the club allowed Buval to train with the reserve team until he found a new club, but this permission was later revoked. On 10 July 2011, Buval terminated his contract, citing the club's refusal to let him train as just cause. He subsequently signed with Portuguese club Clube Desportivo Feirense on 1 October 2011. Buval filed a claim with FIFA, seeking unpaid wages for June and part of July 2011, compensation for damages, and the salary difference for the remaining contract period. The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber ruled partially in Buval’s favor, ordering KS Lechia Gdańsk to pay €15,141 in unpaid wages and €152,892 as compensation for breach of contract, with a 5% annual interest if unpaid within 30 days.
KS Lechia Gdańsk appealed the FIFA decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing that the appendix terminated the contract by mutual agreement. The CAS panel examined the case, focusing on the validity of the appendix and the club’s refusal to allow Buval to train. The panel found that the club failed to prove the authenticity of the appendix, noting discrepancies in signatures, inconsistencies in the document's details, and the lack of registration with the Polish Football Association as required. The panel also dismissed an expert opinion on the signatures due to methodological flaws and lack of verification. The CAS concluded that the contract was not terminated by mutual agreement and that Buval had just cause to terminate the contract due to the club’s refusal to permit him to train, which constituted a breach of contract.
The CAS upheld the FIFA decision, reinforcing the principle that clubs must honor their contractual obligations, including allowing players to train, and that unjustified refusal provides grounds for termination with just cause. The appeal by KS Lechia Gdańsk was dismissed, and the original FIFA ruling remained in force. The case underscores the importance of clear evidence in disputes over contractual documents and the rights of players under employment contracts in professional football. The final decision highlights the legal complexities of contractual disputes in sports, particularly when allegations of forgery and breaches arise.