The case revolves around a dispute between Cypriot football club AC Omonia Nicosia and professional footballer Iago Bouzon Amoedo concerning the termination of Bouzon’s employment contract. The conflict began when AC Omonia terminated Bouzon’s contract on August 4, 2012, citing just cause due to alleged misconduct, including disrespectful behavior and unethical demands. Bouzon contested the termination, claiming it was unjust and sought compensation for unpaid salaries and breach of contract. The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) partially ruled in Bouzon’s favor, ordering AC Omonia to pay €53,529 in outstanding remuneration and €78,430 as compensation.
The original contract, signed on July 1, 2010, was set to expire on May 31, 2013, with Bouzon entitled to a net salary of €600,000, paid in monthly installments. An additional Image Rights Contract provided further benefits, including accommodation and travel allowances. AC Omonia accused Bouzon of refusing salary payments and conspiring with agents to demand excessive compensation, while Bouzon disputed the club’s claim that outstanding salaries up to June 2012 had been settled. Shortly after termination, Bouzon signed a new contract with Spanish club Xerez CD, earning significantly less than his previous salary.
AC Omonia appealed the FIFA DRC’s decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), contesting the DRC’s jurisdiction and arguing that Bouzon failed to mitigate his damages by securing comparable employment. The CAS panel upheld the FIFA DRC’s decision, emphasizing that the burden of proof for just cause termination lies with the party alleging it. The panel found AC Omonia’s evidence insufficient to justify termination, noting the termination letter suggested unilateral action rather than mutual agreement. The panel also rejected AC Omonia’s argument regarding mitigation, stating that a party terminating a contract without just cause cannot impose an obligation on the other party to seek higher-paying employment to reduce damages.
The CAS affirmed the FIFA DRC’s award, requiring AC Omonia to pay Bouzon the outstanding amounts with interest if delayed. The decision reinforces key principles in employment disputes, including the jurisdictional competence of the FIFA DRC, evidentiary burdens in termination cases, and equitable considerations in damage mitigation. The ruling underscores that contractual obligations must be respected, and unilateral terminations require substantial proof of justification to avoid liability for breach.
AC Omonia further argued that the DRC lacked jurisdiction over the Image Rights Contract, claiming it should be handled by Cypriot authorities. They also contended that the contract was terminated by mutual agreement and accused Bouzon of applying unfair pressure during negotiations. Bouzon countered that the DRC had proper jurisdiction, as the Image Rights Contract was integral to the employment agreement, and maintained that the termination was unilateral and without just cause. The CAS confirmed its jurisdiction over the dispute, as both parties had agreed to it in the Order of Procedure. The Panel reviewed the case de novo, applying FIFA regulations and, subsidiarily, Swiss law, and upheld the DRC’s competence to handle the Image Rights Contract.
The Panel found no evidence of mutual termination, concluding instead that AC Omonia had unilaterally terminated the contract without just cause. It also rejected AC Omonia’s argument about Bouzon’s mitigation efforts, affirming the DRC’s calculation of compensation. The Panel dismissed AC Omonia’s claim that a deposit held by the Cyprus Football Association should offset damages, as it pertained to prior obligations unrelated to the breach.
In conclusion, the CAS upheld the FIFA DRC’s decision, confirming that Bouzon was entitled to compensation for the unjust termination of the contract. The appeal was dismissed, and the original award was affirmed in full. The case highlights the CAS’s role in resolving international sports disputes and its adherence to established legal frameworks, emphasizing the importance of contractual stability under FIFA regulations.