The case involves a contractual dispute between professional football player Mubarak Wakaso and FC Rubin Kazan, heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The central issue revolved around the interpretation of a Suspension Agreement signed on 30 August 2015, which temporarily suspended Wakaso's employment contract with Rubin Kazan while he was on loan to FC Las Palmas. The agreement stipulated that Rubin Kazan would pay Wakaso an unconditional compensation of €381,250 and a conditional compensation of €300,000, the latter contingent on Rubin Kazan receiving payments from FC Las Palmas. The conditional compensation was explicitly stated to be paid net, but the agreement did not clarify whether the unconditional compensation was also net or gross.
Wakaso claimed that Rubin Kazan failed to pay the full amount of the unconditional compensation, withholding €114,375 as taxes. He argued that both compensations were intended to be net, as evidenced by prior communications and the club's previous net payments. Rubin Kazan, however, contended that only the conditional compensation was net, while the unconditional compensation was subject to standard tax deductions. The dispute escalated when Wakaso filed a claim with the Football Union of Russia (FUR) Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled in favor of Rubin Kazan, stating that only the conditional compensation was explicitly net. Wakaso appealed this decision to CAS, seeking the outstanding amount plus interest.
The Sole Arbitrator, Lars Hilliger, emphasized the need to interpret the agreement based on the parties' true intentions and good faith. He examined the contractual language, prior communications, and the parties' conduct, noting that Rubin Kazan had consistently made net payments before the loan and had even treated partial payments as net in its submissions to the FUR DRC. The Arbitrator concluded that the unconditional compensation was intended to be net, as the context and prior dealings supported this interpretation. Consequently, Rubin Kazan was ordered to pay the remaining €114,375 plus interest.
The case highlights the complexities of contractual interpretations in sports law, particularly regarding tax obligations and net salary clauses. It underscores the importance of clear contractual terms and mutual understanding between parties. The Arbitrator's decision provided clarity on the binding nature of contractual obligations and reinforced the principle of good faith in interpreting agreements. The ruling overturned the FUR DRC's decision, upholding Wakaso's appeal and dismissing all other claims. The final award was issued on 13 January 2017, resolving the dispute in favor of Wakaso.