The case involves a dispute between professional football player Jean-Sony Alcenat and Steaua Bucuresti regarding the termination of their employment contract, centered on whether the termination was justified and who was responsible. The player claimed the club breached the contract by failing to assist with his visa renewal, while the club argued the player neglected his contractual obligations. The dispute was initially reviewed by FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled partially in favor of the player, ordering the club to pay for days worked and reimburse travel expenses. Dissatisfied with the decision, the player appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The CAS panel, composed of Prof. Petros Mavroidis, Mr. Clifford Hendel, and Mr. Efraim Barak, examined the case under Swiss law, FIFA regulations, and Romanian law, which governed the contract. The panel emphasized the burden of proof, stating the party making a claim must substantiate it. The concept of "just cause" for termination, akin to "good reason" under Swiss law, was discussed, with only material breaches qualifying. The panel also considered whether prior notice was required, concluding warnings might not be necessary if one party clearly intends not to fulfill obligations.
The employment contract, signed in 2015, included salary, rent allowances, and travel benefits, along with player obligations regarding medical treatment and conduct. A "Professional Annex" detailed further obligations and penalties for non-compliance. In 2016, the player was loaned to FC Voluntari, during which the club informed him of visa renewal procedures. However, the player delayed renewal due to participation in the Copa Centenario with Haiti, where he suffered an injury. Upon returning to Romania, his visa renewal was denied due to procedural issues, including an incorrect application for a civil visa instead of an employment visa and failure to renew his rental agreement.
The player terminated the contract on August 11, 2016, citing the club's negligence, and later signed with C.D. Feirense. The DRC ruled the player breached the contract by consulting a national team doctor without informing the club and found neither party was interested in continuing the relationship. The club was ordered to pay the player for days worked and reimburse airfare. The CAS panel largely agreed with the DRC but adjusted some findings. It held the player responsible for the visa non-renewal, as securing a rental agreement was his duty, not the club's. The panel also ruled the club must pay the player's full salary until the visa refusal date and reimburse his business class flight, as the contract did not specify economy class.
The panel rejected the player's claim for compensation based on the "specificity of sport," finding no club breach. The final CAS award, issued on October 26, 2018, ordered the club to pay 14,667.20 EUR in outstanding remuneration plus 5% annual interest and reimburse 2,738 EUR for the flight. The case highlights the complexities of contractual and visa-related disputes in professional football, underscoring the importance of adherence to obligations and the legal standards applied by CAS in resolving such conflicts.