The case revolves around a contractual dispute between Dubai Cultural Sports Club (the Club) and professional football player André Alves Dos Santos (the Player). The dispute arose after the Player terminated his contract on 16 October 2013, citing multiple breaches by the Club, including non-payment of salaries for August and September 2013, failure to provide an agreed-upon car, and exclusion from team training. The Player had sent several default notices to the Club, which failed to rectify the breaches. The Player subsequently filed a claim with FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled in his favor, ordering the Club to pay outstanding salaries, compensation for breach of contract, and a housing allowance, plus interest. The Club appealed this decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing that the Player had breached the contract by underperforming and missing training sessions, for which he had been fined. The Club contended that the Player’s termination was unjustified and sought to overturn the DRC’s decision.
The CAS proceedings involved a hearing in Lausanne on 12 April 2016, where both parties presented their arguments. The CAS panel examined whether the Club’s financial breaches constituted just cause for the Player’s termination. The panel emphasized that timely salary payments are a fundamental obligation, and persistent non-payment can justify contract termination if the employee has issued prior warnings, which the Player had done. The panel also dismissed the Club’s claims that fines for poor performance and missed training justified withholding payments, citing insufficient evidence. Additionally, the Club’s failure to provide the agreed car and its exclusion of the Player from team training were deemed material breaches. The panel rejected the Club’s argument that payments made to the Player’s former club should offset the owed salaries, as this defense had not been raised earlier and the Club had already admitted the debt.
The CAS upheld the FIFA DRC’s decision, ruling that the Player’s termination was justified due to the Club’s persistent breaches. The Club was ordered to compensate the Player for unpaid salaries, breach of contract, and housing allowance, with interest. The panel found the compensation amount reasonable, considering the severity of the breaches and the Player’s limited opportunity to find alternative employment. The Club’s appeal regarding UAE labor law limitations was dismissed due to lack of substantiation. The CAS decision reinforced the principle that clubs must adhere to their contractual obligations, and players may lawfully terminate contracts if these obligations are unmet after due warning. The ruling underscored the importance of contractual compliance in professional football and the legal protections available to players in cases of employer default. The CAS ultimately dismissed the Club’s appeal, confirming the FIFA DRC’s decision in favor of the Player.