The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled on a dispute between FC Dacia Chisinau and Goran Stankovski, a Macedonian football player, regarding the unilateral termination of his employment contract. The case centered on whether Stankovski had just cause to terminate the contract due to the club's alleged breaches, including non-payment of salaries, exclusion from team activities, and inadequate training conditions. The contract, signed in August 2010 and valid until July 2012, outlined obligations for both parties, with the club responsible for salary payments and professional support, while the player was expected to perform to his best abilities. A supplementary agreement, the "Protocole," specified salary details and dispute resolution under FIFA regulations.
Stankovski faced multiple issues during his tenure with the club. After sustaining injuries in late 2010, he was pressured in January 2011 to sign a termination document, which he refused. The club then excluded him from team training, imposed an unsupervised individual training program in harsh winter conditions, and stopped covering his accommodation costs. Stankovski sent multiple notices to the club, including via email and through the Football Federation of Macedonia, demanding compliance with contractual terms and payment of owed salaries, but received no adequate response. He eventually left Moldova in February 2011, after which the club accused him of breaching the contract.
The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber initially ruled in Stankovski’s favor in March 2014, ordering the club to pay outstanding salaries and compensation. FC Dacia Chisinau appealed to CAS, arguing that only one month's salary was unpaid and that Stankovski’s termination was unjustified. The club also contested the FIFA decision’s findings on unpaid wages and alleged that Stankovski violated contract terms by leaving without permission. Stankovski countered that the club’s failure to pay salaries for December 2010 and January 2011, along with mistreatment, intimidation, and poor training conditions, justified his termination.
The CAS panel examined the payment terms under the contract and Protocole, concluding that the club had outstanding salary obligations. It also found that the club’s actions—such as isolating Stankovski, ignoring his complaints, and subjecting him to inadequate training—constituted serious breaches. The panel ruled that these breaches, combined with unpaid salaries for two consecutive months, provided Stankovski with just cause to terminate the contract. The CAS upheld the FIFA decision, affirming Stankovski’s entitlement to unpaid salaries and compensation, plus interest, and dismissed the club’s appeal. The ruling emphasized the importance of clubs adhering to contractual obligations and highlighted the legal consequences of failing to meet such commitments in professional sports.