The case involves a legal dispute between Samuel Inkoom, a professional football player from Ghana, and Andrew Evans, a licensed players' agent, along with FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict originated from a representation contract signed on December 1, 2010, granting Evans exclusive rights to negotiate on Inkoom's behalf for two years in exchange for 10% of Inkoom's gross income. Following Inkoom's transfer from FC Basel to FC Dnipro in January 2011, Evans alleged a breach of contract and filed a claim with FIFA's Players' Status Committee (PSC). On March 19, 2014, the PSC ruled in Evans' favor, ordering Inkoom to pay €352,500 within 30 days, with a 5% annual interest penalty for late payment. The decision became final and binding as neither party requested the grounds for the ruling.
Inkoom failed to comply with the PSC decision, leading FIFA to escalate the matter to its Disciplinary Committee (FIFA DC) on May 30, 2014. Despite repeated reminders, Inkoom did not settle the debt, prompting the FIFA DC to initiate disciplinary proceedings on October 22, 2014. On December 15, 2014, the FIFA DC found Inkoom guilty of non-compliance under Article 64 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, imposing a fine of CHF 20,000 and granting a final 180-day grace period to pay the owed amount. Failure to comply would result in an automatic one-year ban on all football-related activities, enforceable without further action. The Ghana Football Association (GFA) was tasked with enforcing the decision, with non-compliance risking sanctions such as expulsion from FIFA competitions.
Inkoom appealed to CAS on February 27, 2015, challenging the FIFA DC's decision and requesting a suspension of proceedings pending a reconsideration by the PSC. He argued that the PSC decision was improperly notified and based on incorrect facts, alleging Evans violated their agreement by receiving unauthorized payments. FIFA and Evans countered that the PSC decision was final and binding, and the disciplinary sanctions were justified. A hearing was held on September 23, 2015, with Inkoom attending via video link due to visa issues. The Sole Arbitrator, Manfred Nan, examined the case, focusing on whether the PSC decision was properly notified and whether Inkoom had complied.
The arbitrator found that Inkoom's legal representative, BAC Solicitors, had received the PSC decision, and Inkoom's claim of unawareness was unconvincing. The arbitrator emphasized that the FIFA DC's role was limited to assessing compliance, not revisiting the merits of the PSC decision. CAS jurisprudence supports this narrow scope, allowing only procedural reviews unless enforcement would violate public policy, which was not the case here. The arbitrator upheld the FIFA DC's decision, dismissing Inkoom's appeal and confirming the disciplinary measures, including the fine and conditional ban.
The case underscores the binding nature of FIFA's decisions and the high threshold for overturning them. It highlights the importance of procedural adherence, evidence submission, and the limited scope for challenging enforcement actions in football-related disputes. The ruling reinforces FIFA's disciplinary framework and the consequences of non-compliance for players, emphasizing the finality of its decisions and the rigorous enforcement mechanisms in place. The award, issued on December 10, 2015, concluded the proceedings, affirming the disciplinary sanctions and rejecting further claims.