The case involves a dispute between Raja Club Athletic de Casablanca (Raja Club), Baniyas Football Sports Club (Baniyas), and the player Ismail Benlamalem, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in 2017. The central issue revolved around the termination of the player's employment contract with Baniyas without just cause, leading to legal proceedings under FIFA's Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). The player had been loaned from Raja Club to Baniyas in 2012, with the loan agreement stipulating financial terms, including a loan fee and player remuneration. Disputes arose when the player left Baniyas in December 2012 without returning, prompting Baniyas to claim a breach of contract.
The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) initially ruled in favor of Baniyas, ordering the player to repay part of an advanced payment and compensate Baniyas for breach of contract, with Raja Club held jointly and severally liable. The player and Raja Club appealed to the CAS, arguing the termination was justified due to alleged mistreatment by Baniyas, including unpaid medical expenses and inadequate housing. However, the CAS panel found no evidence supporting these claims and concluded the player's prolonged absence without justification constituted a unilateral termination without just cause. The panel emphasized contractual stability under Swiss law and FIFA regulations, noting the player's failure to communicate or return despite Baniyas' efforts to retain him.
A key legal principle in the case was res judicata, which prevents re-litigation of the same matter once a final judgment has been issued. The player had initially appealed the DRC's decision but later withdrew, rendering it binding on him. The CAS ruled that Raja Club's appeal could proceed independently, as joint liability did not automatically extend res judicata to all parties. The panel also clarified that Raja Club, as the first club to register the player after the breach, was the "new club" under Article 17 of the RSTP, making it jointly liable for compensation regardless of its awareness of the dispute. The panel rejected Raja Club's argument that it was merely reintegrating the player after the loan, emphasizing that loan transfers are subject to the same contractual stability rules as permanent transfers.
The CAS upheld the DRC's decision, dismissing the appeals and affirming the compensation award to Baniyas. The ruling reinforced the importance of contractual stability in football, ensuring clubs and players adhere to their obligations. The case highlighted the complexities of loan agreements, joint liability, and the procedural challenges in resolving disputes, including failed attempts to verify disputed signatures due to the player's non-cooperation. Ultimately, the decision underscored the legal and financial consequences of unjustified contract terminations in professional football.