The case involves a dispute between FK Sileks, a North Macedonian football club, and FK Sloga Leskovac, a Serbian club, over training compensation for a player who turned professional in June 2016 after signing with FK Sileks. The player had previously trained as an amateur with several clubs, including FK Sloga Leskovac, between 2011 and 2012. In 2017, FK Sloga Leskovac and other clubs filed claims with FIFA, seeking training compensation from FK Sileks. FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber ruled in favor of FK Sloga Leskovac, ordering FK Sileks to pay EUR 36,667 plus interest, as FK Sileks did not respond to the claim.
FK Sileks appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), requesting consolidation of related cases, which was denied due to procedural issues. During the proceedings, FK Sloga Leskovac submitted a statement acknowledging that its previous administration had signed a waiver of training compensation in June 2016 and expressed financial inability to continue the case. It also apologized to FK Sileks for any damages. FK Sileks interpreted this as acceptance of its appeal and amended its requests accordingly. The case proceeded with a sole arbitrator, Professor Petros C. Mavroidis, as FK Sloga Leskovac failed to submit a formal answer on time.
The arbitrator determined that a hearing was unnecessary, as written submissions sufficed. FK Sileks argued that FK Sloga Leskovac's Statement of Defence, authenticated by the club's letterhead and stamp, confirmed the waiver and validated its appeal. FK Sloga Leskovac did not contest the authenticity of the waiver or submit further arguments. The arbitrator found no reason to doubt the Statement of Defence or the waiver, concluding that the FIFA decision was incorrect.
The CAS ruled in favor of FK Sileks, overturning the FIFA decision and releasing FK Sileks from the payment obligation. Procedural costs were assigned to FK Sloga Leskovac. The case underscores the binding nature of written agreements and the importance of procedural compliance in arbitration. It also highlights how documented acknowledgments and authentic submissions play a critical role in resolving sports disputes. The decision reinforces the principle that clubs must adhere to their contractual commitments and procedural obligations in legal proceedings.