The case involves a dispute between FC Petrolul Ploiesti and professional football player Aleksandar Stojmirovic, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict arose from the termination of Stojmirovic's employment contract with the club, which he claimed was justified due to the club's failure to meet financial obligations, including unpaid salaries and inadequate training conditions. The club, however, argued that it had orally terminated the contract in June 2012, a claim rejected by the Sole Arbitrator, Bernhard Welten, due to the lack of formal written notice. The arbitrator found that the club's repeated non-payment of salaries and exclusion of the player from training sessions constituted substantial breaches of the contract, justifying Stojmirovic's unilateral termination under Article 14 of FIFA's Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP).
The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) initially ruled in favor of Stojmirovic, ordering the club to pay EUR 129,074 in compensation plus 5% annual interest. FC Petrolul Ploiesti appealed this decision to CAS, contesting the compensation calculation and arguing that the player had failed to mitigate damages by rejecting an offer from a lower-division club. The Sole Arbitrator upheld the DRC's decision, emphasizing that the player was not obligated to accept employment that would harm his career prospects. The arbitrator also noted the club's failure to provide evidence supporting its claims and reaffirmed the player's right to compensation for unpaid salaries and housing benefits, adjusted for earnings from subsequent contracts in Hungary and Serbia.
The case highlights key principles in sports employment disputes, including the employer's obligation to fulfill financial commitments and provide suitable working conditions. The arbitrator's decision reinforced the protection of players' rights under FIFA regulations and Swiss law, underscoring that repeated non-payment of salaries constitutes a fundamental breach of contract. The ruling also clarified that players are not required to accept inferior employment offers to mitigate damages, particularly if such offers would negatively impact their professional standing. Ultimately, the CAS upheld the FIFA DRC's award, dismissing the club's appeal and affirming the player's entitlement to compensation. The case serves as a precedent for similar disputes, emphasizing the importance of contractual adherence and the legal protections afforded to players under international sports regulations.