The case involves a complex legal dispute between Fovu Club de Baham and Canon Sportif de Yaoundé, two Cameroonian football clubs, over the eligibility of a player during a match in the 2014/2015 Ligue 1 championship. Fovu Club alleged that Canon fielded an ineligible player, Jean Calvin Kohn, who was registered under a different identity with another club, Conquérants Sportifs de Mékong. Despite Fovu's protests, the match ended in a 1-1 draw. Fovu filed a complaint with the Cameroonian Football Federation (FECAFOOT), leading to a series of legal proceedings. Initially, the Homologation and Discipline Commission upheld the match result without addressing Fovu's complaint. Fovu then appealed to the FECAFOOT Appeals Commission, which ruled in their favor, suspending the player and awarding the match to Fovu by default. Canon challenged this decision before the Cameroonian Olympic Committee's Arbitration Chamber (CCA), which annulled the Appeals Commission's ruling, citing lack of jurisdiction, and reinstated the original match result. This decision affected the final league standings, relegating Fovu to Ligue 2 while Canon remained in Ligue 1.
Fovu appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), seeking to overturn the CCA's decision and reinstate the Appeals Commission's ruling. The CAS rejected Fovu's request for provisional measures to suspend the CCA's decision and halt the championship. The case proceeded with Canon and the National Professional Football League of Cameroon (LFPC) as respondents. The CAS emphasized the principle of lex specialis derogat legi generali, stating that specific league regulations override general procedural rules. It also noted that the hierarchy of norms does not apply when two sporting texts have different purposes and no subordinate relationship. The CAS ruled that Fovu's appeal, directed solely against Canon, could not result in reinstatement into the championship without involving the LFPC or FECAFOOT, as they were responsible for organizing the league.
The CAS ultimately concluded that the CCA's decision to annul the Appeals Commission's ruling was incorrect, as Fovu had followed the proper procedural path under the applicable regulations. The CAS reinstated the Appeals Commission's decision, confirming the player's ineligibility and the match forfeiture. However, it rejected Fovu's request for reinstatement in Ligue 1, citing practical and legal challenges, as the leagues were already underway. The case highlights the complexities of sports arbitration, particularly when multiple regulatory bodies and conflicting rules are involved. The final decision reinforced the importance of adhering to specific competition regulations and the limitations of legal remedies when key stakeholders are not directly implicated in the proceedings. The ruling underscored the need for clarity in regulatory frameworks to avoid similar disputes in the future.