The case involves a dispute between Cruzeiro E.C. and C.A. Atenas over unpaid transfer fees for a football player, as stipulated in a contract signed on 15 July 2015. The agreement required Cruzeiro to pay Atenas $3,400,000 in five annual installments, with payments to be deposited into a bank account "to be informed" by Atenas. However, Cruzeiro failed to make any payments, prompting Atenas to file a claim with FIFA on 9 August 2016, seeking the full amount plus interest and penalties. Cruzeiro defended its inaction by arguing that Atenas had not provided the necessary bank account details, thus preventing payment. On 22 November 2016, FIFA’s Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee partially accepted Atenas’ claim, ordering Cruzeiro to pay the full amount plus 5% annual interest from 1 January 2016, along with procedural costs. Cruzeiro appealed this decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on 13 February 2017, requesting a sole arbitrator. The CAS proceedings were conducted based on written submissions without a hearing.
The CAS Sole Arbitrator, Ricardo de Buen Rodríguez, upheld the FIFA decision, ruling that Cruzeiro’s payment obligation was unconditional and not contingent on Atenas providing bank details. The arbitrator emphasized that the bank account clause was merely accessory and did not absolve Cruzeiro of its contractual duties. The principle of good faith required Cruzeiro to actively seek the necessary information to fulfill its obligations. The arbitrator also rejected Cruzeiro’s request to reallocate FIFA’s procedural costs, noting that CAS panels lack the authority to modify costs imposed by prior proceedings. The decision reinforced the principle that the transferee club (Cruzeiro) bears full responsibility for ensuring payment, even if the transferor club (Atenas) delays providing payment details.
The case highlights the importance of contractual clarity and the principle of good faith in sports-related disputes. The arbitrator found that Cruzeiro’s failure to request bank details or make any payments demonstrated a lack of good faith, particularly after receiving multiple payment requests from Atenas. The contract included a clause allowing Atenas to demand the full remaining amount if any installment was overdue by more than five months. Since the claim was filed over seven months after the due date, the arbitrator ruled that Atenas was entitled to the full $3,400,000, plus 5% annual interest from 1 January 2016. The final CAS award, issued on 11 July 2017, dismissed Cruzeiro’s appeal and confirmed the FIFA decision in its entirety, including the procedural costs. The outcome underscores the binding nature of contractual obligations in football transfers and the role of CAS in resolving such disputes.