The case involves a dispute between Al Hilal Saudi Club and professional football player Abdou Kader Mangane, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on 17 June 2016. The conflict arose from a termination agreement signed on 24 July 2014, ending Mangane’s employment contract with Al Hilal. The agreement stipulated that the club would pay Mangane EUR 750,000 in installments, but Al Hilal failed to make any payments. After sending a default letter on 15 July 2015, which went unheeded, Mangane filed a claim with FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) on 12 June 2015, seeking the owed amount plus interest and legal costs, and requesting sanctions against Al Hilal under Article 12bis of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP, 2015 edition).
Al Hilal contested the applicability of the 2015 RSTP, arguing the agreement predated the provision’s enforcement. However, the FIFA DRC ruled in favor of Mangane, ordering Al Hilal to pay the EUR 750,000 plus 5% annual interest from 12 June 2015, and imposed a warning on the club for overdue payables. The DRC determined the 2015 RSTP applied because the claim was filed after 1 April 2015, and the contract was signed after 1 September 2001, falling outside the exception for older disputes. The DRC also noted Mangane had followed proper procedure by issuing a written default notice with a ten-day deadline, as required by Article 12bis.
Al Hilal appealed to CAS, naming Mangane as the respondent. The sole arbitrator, Prof. Petros Mavroidis, addressed two key legal issues. First, he confirmed the 2015 RSTP applied, as the case was submitted after 1 April 2015, and the contract was signed after 1 September 2001, making Article 12bis enforceable. Second, he ruled that Mangane was not the proper respondent in the appeal, as the sanction was imposed by FIFA, not the player, and Mangane had no authority to affect Al Hilal’s legal standing. The arbitrator emphasized that appeals against FIFA-imposed sanctions must target FIFA itself, not the player who initiated the proceedings.
The CAS upheld the FIFA DRC’s decision, reinforcing the applicability of the 2015 RSTP and clarifying procedural requirements for appeals involving sporting sanctions. The ruling underscored FIFA’s authority to impose disciplinary measures and established that players lack standing as respondents in appeals against such sanctions. The case highlights the importance of adhering to contractual obligations and the procedural framework governing disputes in international football. The arbitrator dismissed Al Hilal’s appeal, confirming the FIFA DRC’s decision without modification, and all other requests for relief were also dismissed. The decision serves as a precedent for the proper application of FIFA regulations and the procedural correctness of appeals in sports disputes.