The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on February 2, 2017, in the dispute between professional football player Abel Aguilar Tapias and Hércules de Alicante FC. The case revolved around the validity of a waiver signed by the player, which relinquished his rights to unpaid salaries and a share of the transfer fee from his move to Toulouse FC in 2013. The player contested the waiver, claiming it was signed under duress, arguing that Hércules pressured him by threatening to derail his transfer and jeopardize his career and participation in the upcoming World Cup. The CAS panel, composed of Prof. Petros Mavroidis, Mr. Pedro Tomas Marqués, and Mr. José Juan Pintó, examined the case under applicable regulations and Spanish law, focusing on the legal concept of duress.
The dispute stemmed from a series of contractual agreements. In 2010, Hércules acquired the player from Udinese Calcio for €1.5 million, with clauses ensuring Udinese would receive additional payments if the player was later sold. The player signed a four-year employment contract with Hércules, valid until June 2014. In 2012, he was transferred to La Coruña but had an option to return for the 2013-2014 season, leading to a new contract with a yearly salary of €700,000. In August 2013, Toulouse FC expressed interest in acquiring the player, and a transfer agreement was reached for €1.8 million. As part of the transfer, Hércules required the player to sign a waiver forfeiting his rights to unpaid salaries for July and August 2013 and any claims against the club, including a 15% share of the transfer fee under Spanish labor law (Real Decreto 1006/1985).
The player initially refused to sign the waiver, arguing he was entitled to his salaries and transfer fee share. However, Hércules delayed the transfer process by withholding administrative steps in FIFA’s Transfer Matching System (TMS) until the waiver was signed. Toulouse accused Hércules of blackmail, and FIFA investigated but later dismissed the charges. The player, under pressure to secure his transfer and avoid missing the World Cup, eventually signed the waiver under protest. He later filed a claim with FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) in August 2013, seeking unpaid wages and the transfer fee share. The DRC dismissed his claim in September 2015, ruling the waiver was valid and his duress allegation lacked evidence. The player appealed to CAS in February 2016.
The CAS panel analyzed whether the waiver was signed under duress, requiring proof of an imminent and serious threat under Spanish law. The player argued Hércules coerced him by exploiting his urgent need to transfer, while Hércules maintained the waiver was standard and voluntary. The panel found insufficient evidence of duress, noting the player had alternatives, such as remaining with Hércules. It also rejected his late invocation of Swiss law (Article 341 of the Swiss Code of Obligations), which prohibits employees from waiving salary claims, as irrelevant and improperly raised. The panel upheld the waiver’s validity, concluding it covered both unpaid salaries and the transfer fee share, based on its wording and contextual evidence, including an email from the player’s agent indicating prior willingness to waive similar fees.
The CAS dismissed the player’s appeal, confirming the DRC’s decision and rejecting all additional claims. The ruling emphasized the importance of contractual clarity and voluntary agreement in sports disputes, highlighting the high threshold for proving duress and the primacy of FIFA regulations over national laws in such cases. The decision underscores the complexities of player-club negotiations and the legal frameworks governing international football transfers.