The case involves a dispute between Mr. V., a Russian football coach, and Football Club X., a Kazakhstani football club, over the termination of Mr. V.'s employment contract. The contract, signed on 13 January 2013, was valid for two years and included a clause stating that if the club terminated the contract without just cause, Mr. V. would receive compensation equivalent to his remaining salary. On 15 December 2012, the club issued a termination order, claiming Mr. V. had resigned, which he contested, arguing it was a unilateral termination without cause. He sought unpaid wages and compensation as per the contract. The dispute was first brought before FIFA, which ruled in Mr. V.'s favor, awarding him compensation. The club appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which upheld FIFA's decision. CAS emphasized that parties can agree to derogate from the principle of mitigation of loss, meaning compensation could be set at the full outstanding salary without deductions for earnings elsewhere. The burden of proof for such an agreement lies with the party asserting it. CAS found the club liable for breach of contract and ordered payment of the claimed amounts, including unpaid wages, bonuses, and additional expenses, with interest. The ruling reinforced the enforceability of contractual terms under Swiss law, which governed the dispute, and highlighted the importance of clear agreements in employment contracts.
FIFA's Bureau of the Players’ Status Committee initially ruled that Mr. V.'s resignation had been revoked, as evidenced by his continued work for the club. The Bureau concluded the club had terminated the contract without just cause and was liable for compensation, adjusted to Kazakhstani Tenge (KZT) as per the contract. Mr. V. was awarded KZT 2,621,400 for outstanding salary and KZT 22,016,800 as compensation, minus earnings from another club. The Bureau also granted 5% annual interest but rejected other claims due to insufficient evidence. The final decision, issued on 19 March 2014, required the club to pay the amounts within 30 days, with interest, and share procedural costs of CHF 12,000 equally.
The case proceeded to CAS, where both parties filed appeals. The respondent failed to meet procedural deadlines, leading to the termination of one appeal due to non-payment of costs. The Sole Arbitrator ensured procedural fairness, allowing both parties to present their cases. The respondent introduced new arguments late, which were disregarded under CAS rules. CAS confirmed its jurisdiction under Swiss law and dismissed the respondent's argument for Kazakhstani law. The appellant sought full compensation without deductions, arguing the Bureau incorrectly applied mitigation of loss. The Sole Arbitrator ruled in favor of the appellant, finding the contract explicitly stipulated no deductions for unjust termination. The appellant was awarded KZT 31,456,800 (full salary for the remaining contract period) plus 5% annual interest from the claim's filing date. The ruling underscored the enforceability of contractual terms and the appellant's right to full compensation as agreed. The club was ordered to pay the amounts within 30 days, with default interest for delays, and failure to comply would trigger FIFA disciplinary action. All other claims were dismissed, reaffirming the importance of adhering to contractual agreements and procedural fairness in arbitration.