The case revolves around a dispute between professional football player Michaël Ciani and Sporting Clube de Portugal (SCP) concerning the termination of his employment contract. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued an award on 21 July 2017, addressing whether the termination agreement signed by both parties was valid or if it was signed under duress. Ciani, a French footballer, joined SCP in July 2015 under a two-year contract with specific termination clauses. Shortly after, an addendum extended the contract for an additional season. However, by August 2015, the parties signed a termination agreement, contingent on Ciani joining Espanyol de Barcelona, which he did.
Ciani later claimed the termination agreement was signed under duress, alleging SCP pressured him into accepting it. Under Portuguese law, duress requires proof of a threat, its unlawfulness, its causal link to the agreement, and the intent to obtain the agreement. The CAS panel found Ciani failed to substantiate these elements, noting no evidence of unlawful coercion. The burden of proof, governed by Swiss law due to CAS jurisdiction, rested on Ciani, who could not demonstrate duress. The panel upheld the termination agreement as a mutual decision, dismissing Ciani's claims.
Ciani's allegations included exclusion from team activities, inadequate training conditions, and psychological pressure, which he argued forced him into signing the agreement. Witnesses, including his agent and teammates, supported his claims, describing his distressed state and unfair treatment. SCP countered that Ciani's separation from the main team was due to fitness issues, denying any coercion. The club maintained the termination was consensual, with Ciani seeking a transfer to Espanyol voluntarily.
The CAS panel evaluated the evidence, including witness testimonies and contractual terms, concluding Ciani's exclusion from the team did not amount to duress. The short timeframe between his exclusion and the termination agreement undermined claims of sustained coercion. The panel also dismissed allegations of an unrecorded €100,000 payment promise, finding no proof of such an arrangement. Under Swiss and Portuguese law, the termination agreement was deemed valid, reflecting genuine consent.
The case highlights the complexities of contractual disputes in professional sports, emphasizing the need for clear evidence to support claims of duress or breach of contract. The panel's decision reaffirmed the principle of "pacta sunt servanda," upholding the binding nature of contracts unless proven otherwise. Ciani's appeal against FIFA's earlier decision was dismissed, with the CAS ruling in favor of SCP. The outcome underscores the legal standards required to invalidate contracts and the importance of credible evidence in arbitration proceedings. The panel's final decision confirmed the validity of the termination agreement and rejected all of Ciani's claims for compensation and damages.