The case involves a dispute between DNN Sports Management LDA, a Portuguese football intermediary company, and Baniyas Football Sports Club Company, a UAE football club, over an alleged unpaid agent fee related to a player transfer. DNN claimed it was owed USD 462,500 plus interest and a percentage of any future transfer fee, based on an employment offer signed in January 2017. Baniyas denied any knowledge of the agreement, leading DNN to file a claim with the UAE Football Association (UAE FA) in October 2017. The UAE FA’s Players’ Status Committee (PSC) rejected DNN’s claim due to insufficient evidence, prompting DNN to appeal directly to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in June 2018, bypassing the UAE FA’s internal Arbitration Tribunal.
The sole arbitrator, Georg von Segesser, ruled that CAS lacked jurisdiction because DNN had not exhausted all local remedies as required by UAE FA regulations. The UAE FA’s statutes mandated that appeals of PSC decisions must first go to the UAE FA Arbitration Tribunal, whose rulings are final. Since DNN did not follow this procedure, it failed to meet the conditions under Article R47 of the CAS Code, which requires the exhaustion of local remedies before international arbitration. The arbitrator also noted that neither the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) nor FIFA statutes provided a direct right to appeal to CAS in this case.
DNN argued that CAS had jurisdiction based on broader federation statutes, while Baniyas maintained that the UAE FA’s internal mechanisms were the proper forum. The arbitrator sided with Baniyas, emphasizing that CAS jurisdiction must be explicitly granted by the relevant national association’s statutes, which the UAE FA’s did not. The decision referenced prior CAS jurisprudence, including the Ashley Cole case, to reinforce the principle that CAS cannot assume jurisdiction without clear statutory provisions or prior exhaustion of internal appeals.
Ultimately, the CAS dismissed DNN’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, underscoring the importance of adhering to procedural rules and exhausting local remedies before seeking international arbitration. The ruling highlights the procedural boundaries of CAS and the necessity of mutual consent for its jurisdiction. The case serves as a reminder of the complexities in sports arbitration and the critical role of following established dispute resolution pathways. The decision closed the case without further action, leaving DNN’s claims unresolved due to procedural non-compliance.