The case involves a dispute between football agent Ciro José Sánchez and player Enzo Nicolás Pérez over a breach of representation contract, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The parties had signed an exclusive representation agreement in 2011, entitling Sánchez to 15% of Pérez's earnings from contracts he negotiated. In 2013, Sánchez filed a claim with FIFA for unpaid remuneration of EUR 337,078.80, but the FIFA Single Judge dismissed it, citing a lack of international dimension since both parties were Argentinean. Sánchez appealed to CAS, which addressed several legal issues, including whether FIFA needed to be named as a respondent and the criteria for classifying the dispute as national or international. The CAS clarified that FIFA's involvement was unnecessary as the dispute was contractual and confirmed its full power of review under Article R57 of the CAS Code. It also determined that the dispute's classification should be based on the parties' place of registration, not their nationalities.
On the merits, the CAS examined Sánchez's claim for compensation, acknowledging his role in Pérez's transfer to Benfica but finding he breached loyalty obligations due to an undisclosed conflict of interest. This breach, under Article 19.8 of the 2008 FIFA Players’ Agents Regulations and Swiss law, nullified his right to compensation. The CAS ruled that Sánchez's actions constituted a substantial breach of contract, justifying the annulment of his claim. The decision emphasized the importance of transparency and loyalty in agent-player relationships, aligning with Swiss legal principles on contractual obligations. The CAS upheld the FIFA Single Judge’s dismissal, reinforcing the consequences of conflicts of interest in agency agreements.
The procedural timeline included Sánchez's appeal filing in March 2015, FIFA's non-intervention, and the constitution of a CAS panel. Pérez contested the claims, arguing the dispute should have been directed against FIFA and that Sánchez violated rules against double brokerage by negotiating alongside another agent. Pérez also deemed the requested commission excessive and disputed claims for seasons beyond those initially filed with FIFA. The CAS admitted some documents while rejecting others and held a hearing in July 2015. A significant development occurred when one arbitrator passed away, leading to replacement without a second hearing.
The CAS ruled that the AFA's dispute resolution body lacked jurisdiction as Pérez was no longer registered with the AFA. It affirmed the Single Judge's competence, classifying the dispute as international based on registration status. The panel decided to rule on the merits without referring the case back to FIFA, citing procedural efficiency. The CAS found Sánchez in a conflict of interest due to side deals with Benfica and Estudiantes, violating Article 19.8 of the 2008 PAR. While the contract was valid at inception, Sánchez's breach of fiduciary duties forfeited his right to compensation. The decision reflected Swiss law principles, particularly Article 415 of the Swiss Code of Obligations, emphasizing fiduciary duties in agency relationships.
Ultimately, the CAS dismissed Sánchez's appeal, rejecting his claim for compensation due to the undisclosed conflict of interest. The ruling underscored the importance of agents adhering to loyalty obligations and avoiding conflicts to maintain the integrity of player representation. The final award, issued on December 7, 2016, upheld the Single Judge's decision and reinforced the regulatory framework governing agent-player relationships.