The case involves a dispute between Beşiktaş Futbol Yatirimlari Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.Ş. (the Club) and professional football player Manuel Henrique Tavares Fernandes (the Player) regarding disciplinary fines imposed by the Club and their set-off against the Player's unpaid salaries. The dispute was adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which issued a final award on 12 July 2016. The Player and the Club had entered into an employment contract on 6 July 2011, valid until 31 May 2014, which included adherence to the Club’s disciplinary regulations. These regulations outlined fines for offenses such as breaches of sportsmanship, physical misconduct, and failure to attend training or matches. Fines were calculated based on the Player’s cost to the Club, with provisions for increasing penalties for repeated violations and deductions from the Player’s salary.
In 2013, the Club imposed fines totaling €256,000.08 on the Player for disciplinary violations, including unauthorized absences and physical misconduct. The Player contested these fines, claiming he was unaware of the disciplinary regulations and that the sanctions violated his rights. The dispute escalated when the Club imposed additional fines in 2014 for the Player’s absence due to a knee injury, which the Club disputed as unjustified. The Player, in turn, claimed unpaid salaries for January to March 2014, leading to proceedings before FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC). The DRC ruled in favor of the Player, ordering the Club to pay a reduced amount of €172,820.08, plus interest, and invalidated the disciplinary fines due to insufficient proof of the Player’s agreement to the regulations.
The Club appealed the DRC’s decision to the CAS, arguing that the Player had initialed the disciplinary regulations and that the fines were legitimate. The CAS Sole Arbitrator examined the validity of the fines, the proportionality of the sanctions, and the set-off against the Player’s salary. The arbitrator found that the Player was subject to the Club’s disciplinary regulations, as his initials on the documents constituted sufficient acknowledgment. The third fine, imposed for the Player’s unpermitted absence in March 2014, was deemed legitimate, as the Player failed to notify the Club in advance, regardless of his medical condition. However, the arbitrator ruled that the fine should be recalculated based on the Player’s first violation, reducing it from €202,666.73 to €106,667.
The CAS upheld the Club’s right to offset the reduced fine against the Player’s salary but ordered the Club to pay the remaining €66,153.08, plus interest, to the Player. The decision emphasized the enforceability of disciplinary measures when properly communicated and documented, while ensuring proportionality in sanctions. The ruling reinforced the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept) and highlighted the balance between a club’s disciplinary authority and a player’s contractual obligations. The CAS dismissed all other claims, concluding the matter with no further actions required. The case underscores the importance of clear contractual terms and adherence to disciplinary procedures in resolving sports-related disputes.