The case involves a legal dispute between Mikhail Danilyuk, a licensed football agent, and the Football Union of Russia (RFU) along with Football Club Shinnik. The conflict arose from an Agency Agreement signed in August 2011, which stipulated that Danilyuk would receive a base remuneration of $50,000 upon successfully transferring a player to the club, with additional payments of $50,000 per season if the player participated in official games during the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 seasons. While the initial payment was made after the player's transfer, disputes emerged over the additional remuneration for the subsequent seasons. Danilyuk filed complaints with the RFU's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled in his favor, but the club appealed to the Players Status Committee (PSC), which overturned the decision. Danilyuk then took the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which ruled in his favor for the 2012-2013 season, ordering the club to pay the owed amount plus interest.
The current appeal focused on the 2013-2014 season, which the club refused to pay. The Sole Arbitrator, Nicholas Stewart QC, emphasized that while previous CAS decisions are not binding, they are respected. The arbitrator upheld the principle of "tempus regit actum," meaning the laws in force at the time of filing the claim govern the proceedings. The arbitrator dismissed the club's procedural objections and confirmed that Danilyuk was entitled to the $50,000 payment, as the player had participated in the required games. The arbitrator also ruled that a 5% annual interest rate on the unpaid amount was fair, reflecting the cost of forced borrowing.
The case also addressed jurisdictional issues, as the RFU argued that Danilyuk lost his right to submit disputes to the DRC after April 1, 2015, due to regulatory changes. The arbitrator rejected this, stating that jurisdiction, once established, should not be retroactively invalidated unless explicitly intended by the governing authority. The arbitrator confirmed the DRC's jurisdiction and upheld Danilyuk's claim, ordering the club to pay the outstanding $50,000 plus interest. The decision underscored the importance of honoring contractual obligations and the procedural integrity of sports arbitration.
Ultimately, the CAS ruled in Danilyuk's favor, overturning the PSC's decision and ordering Football Club Shinnik to pay the claimed amount, converted into Russian roubles at the exchange rate on the payment date, plus 5% annual interest from October 14, 2014, until the payment was made. The ruling highlighted the fairness of the interest rate and dismissed all other claims, reinforcing the principles of contractual compliance and legal certainty in sports dispute resolution.