The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) case CAS 2014/A/3544 involved a dispute between AS Monaco FC and FC Dynamo Kiev over the interpretation of a football transfer agreement concerning player Lukman Haruna. The agreement, signed in June 2011, stipulated a fixed transfer fee of EUR 1,500,000 and an additional conditional compensation of EUR 500,000 if Dynamo Kiev qualified for the UEFA Champions League group stage in specified seasons while Haruna remained under contract. Monaco FC claimed the additional compensation was due after Dynamo Kiev qualified for the 2012/2013 Champions League group stage via play-offs, but Dynamo Kiev refused payment, arguing the clause only applied to direct qualification. Monaco FC filed a claim with FIFA’s Players’ Status Committee, which rejected it, prompting Monaco FC to appeal to CAS.
The CAS panel, composed of arbitrators José María Alonso, Paul Mauriac, and Stuart McInnes, examined the contract under Swiss law, focusing on Article 18 of the Swiss Code of Obligations, which emphasizes interpreting contracts based on the parties’ true intent rather than ambiguous wording. The panel also applied the contra proferentem principle, meaning ambiguous terms should be interpreted against the party that drafted the contract (Dynamo Kiev). Procedural issues arose regarding the hearing’s language, with CAS ruling in favor of English. After a hearing in Lausanne, the panel assessed whether Dynamo Kiev’s play-off qualification triggered the additional payment.
Monaco FC argued the compensation was intended regardless of the qualification method, while Dynamo Kiev insisted it applied only to direct qualification. The panel found the contract’s wording unclear but noted pre-contractual negotiations showed no distinction between direct and indirect qualification. The panel concluded that the sporting and financial benefits of Champions League participation were the same regardless of the qualification route, making it illogical to limit compensation to direct qualification alone. Consequently, the panel ruled in favor of Monaco FC, ordering Dynamo Kiev to pay the EUR 500,000 plus 5% annual interest from the date of Monaco FC’s FIFA filing. However, the panel rejected Monaco FC’s claims for damages and bad faith, finding no evidence of wrongful conduct by Dynamo Kiev.
The CAS decision overturned FIFA’s initial ruling, emphasizing the importance of clear contractual language and the role of pre-contractual negotiations in resolving ambiguities. The award, issued on 28 November 2014, finalized the dispute, highlighting CAS’s role in interpreting football transfer agreements under Swiss law. The case underscores the need for precise drafting in sports contracts to avoid costly legal disputes.