The case involves a dispute between Club Adanaspor and professional footballer Mbilla Etame Serges Flavier, centered on the termination of a contract and subsequent compensation claims. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel issued an award on 7 August 2018, addressing key issues such as contractual interpretation, the player's termination of the contract without just cause, and the calculation of compensation. The player initially signed an employment contract with Club Adanaspor in 2008, valid until 2011, followed by a second contract in 2010, purportedly extending until 2014. However, the end date was later amended to 2013 to comply with Turkish Football Federation (TFF) regulations regarding foreign players. The player joined another club's training sessions while still under contract with Adanaspor, leading the club to impose a fine, which was never paid. The club claimed the player signed a third contract reinstating the 2014 end date, but the player disputed this, arguing the contract was invalid due to TFF regulations and lack of registration.
The CAS panel ruled that the player's actions constituted a de facto termination of the contract without just cause. The panel emphasized the importance of ascertaining the true intention of the parties when interpreting contracts, rather than relying solely on formal terms. It clarified that certain costs incurred by the club, such as replacement costs or lost transfer fees, could be considered objective criteria for calculating compensation under FIFA regulations. The panel noted that each case must be evaluated on its merits, and future match bonuses could be included in assessing the player's residual salary. Additionally, the panel found the fine imposed by the club unenforceable due to lack of evidence that proper disciplinary procedures were followed.
The dispute escalated when the player received an offer from FC Union Berlin in 2013, but the club asserted he was still under contract until 2014. The player later signed with Khazar Lankaran in Azerbaijan, prompting the club to file a claim with FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) seeking damages and sporting sanctions. In July 2017, FIFA’s DRC ruled in favor of the player, rejecting the club’s claims and ordering the club to pay EUR 26,320 in outstanding remuneration, with interest if unpaid within 30 days. The club appealed this decision to CAS, seeking to overturn the ruling and demanding compensation for the alleged breach of contract, along with legal fees. The CAS panel reviewed the evidence and submissions, noting procedural disputes and the enforceability of contractual obligations.
The panel found the Second Employment Agreement to be the central contract in dispute, with the player arguing it expired in 2013 and the club insisting on a 2014 expiry date. The panel concluded that the parties' true intention was for the contract to end in 2014, dismissing the player's claim of a 2013 expiry. The panel also rejected the player's argument that the cumulative duration of his contracts violated FIFA’s five-year limit, as the rule applies to individual contracts, not consecutive ones. The player's departure to join another team in 2013 was deemed a breach of the Second Employment Agreement without just cause. The panel ruled a unilateral termination clause in favor of the club null and void due to its unfair nature, instead applying Article 17.1 of the FIFA Regulations to determine compensation. The panel awarded the club EUR 163,230, offset by the EUR 26,320 owed to the player, resulting in a net payment of EUR 136,910 from the player to the club. All other claims were dismissed.
The CAS decision underscores the importance of clarity in contractual agreements and adherence to regulatory frameworks in football. It highlights the CAS's role in resolving disputes by balancing legal principles with the specific circumstances of each case. The ruling provides a detailed analysis of contractual and regulatory issues, serving as a precedent for similar disputes involving contract terminations and compensation calculations in professional football. The panel's decision reinforces the need for fair contractual terms and proper disciplinary procedures in employment agreements within the sport.