The case involves a dispute between Al Arabi SC (the Club) and Houssine Kharja (the Player), with FIFA as the second respondent, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict arose from the Club's failure to pay the Player outstanding amounts and compensation following the unjustified termination of his contract in 2013. The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) initially ruled in favor of the Player in 2015, a decision partially upheld by CAS in 2017. Despite the CAS award, the Club did not comply, leading the Player to seek FIFA's intervention for enforcement under Article 64 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC).
In January 2018, FIFA's Disciplinary Committee (DisCo) found the Club guilty of non-compliance and imposed a CHF 30,000 fine, granting a 90-day grace period to settle the debt. Failure to pay would result in a six-point deduction from the Club's league standings and potential relegation. The Club appealed to CAS, arguing the sanctions were disproportionate and requesting an extension of the payment deadline to 120 days and a reduction of the points deduction to three. The Player and FIFA opposed the appeal, asserting the sanctions were justified and emphasizing the Club's prolonged non-payment despite ample time.
The CAS panel addressed key legal issues, confirming that only FIFA had standing to be sued in the appeal, as disciplinary proceedings protect FIFA's interests in enforcing its rules. The Club's financial difficulties were deemed insufficient to justify non-payment, and the panel emphasized that sanctions could only be amended if grossly disproportionate, which was not the case here. The panel rejected the Club's requests, noting the lack of evidence supporting its financial claims and the contradiction in seeking an extended deadline while asserting financial precarity. The six-point deduction was upheld, given the significant debt (over €2 million) and the four-year delay in payment.
The CAS dismissed the Club's appeal entirely, upholding FIFA's disciplinary measures and reinforcing the principle that financial constraints do not absolve clubs of their obligations. The ruling underscored the importance of compliance with CAS and FIFA decisions to maintain the integrity of football's regulatory framework. The Club was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings, and all other claims were dismissed. The decision serves as a reminder of the consequences of failing to meet financial obligations in professional football.