The case involves a dispute between football agent Kees Ploegsma and PFC CSKA Moscow regarding unpaid fees for services rendered during the transfer of a Japanese player from VVV-Venlo to CSKA Moscow. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel examined the validity of an oral agreement between the parties, compliance with FIFA Players' Agents Regulations (PAR), and the interruption of the prescription period under Swiss law. The panel ruled that oral contracts are valid under Swiss law, as no specific form is required unless mandated by law. Despite Ploegsma's non-compliance with certain FIFA PAR provisions, the oral agreement was deemed enforceable because the regulations did not explicitly invalidate contracts formed in violation of them. The case also addressed the interruption of the two-year prescription period for claiming payment, finding that CSKA Moscow's acknowledgment of the debt reset the limitation period under Swiss law.
The dispute arose from a draft commission agreement proposed by Ploegsma, representing Sports Entertainment Group (SEG), which outlined a €750,000 fee payable in installments. Although no formal written contract was signed, the parties agreed on terms during negotiations. CSKA later presented an alternative agreement with Fileca Trading Limited, which Ploegsma signed under the assumption it mirrored the original terms. Fileca paid the first two installments but failed to pay the remaining €250,000. Ploegsma filed a claim with FIFA's Players' Status Committee (PSC), which dismissed it due to the lack of a written agreement. Ploegsma appealed to CAS, arguing that the oral agreement was valid and that CSKA had acknowledged the debt.
The CAS panel found that the oral agreement was binding, despite the absence of a written contract and Ploegsma's dual representation of both the player and the club, which violated FIFA regulations. The panel applied Swiss law to address gaps in FIFA's regulations, ruling that CSKA's acknowledgment of the debt in a 2013 email interrupted the limitation period. The panel rejected CSKA's arguments that the fee was excessive or that Ploegsma had waived his claim to the remaining installments. Ultimately, CAS upheld Ploegsma's appeal, ordering CSKA to pay the outstanding €250,000 plus interest. The ruling clarified the enforceability of oral agreements in football transfers and the applicability of Swiss law to resolve regulatory ambiguities. The case underscores the importance of clear contractual terms and compliance with legal frameworks in sports agency dealings.