The case involves a contractual dispute between Russian professional football player Maxim Astafiev and FC Mordovia, along with the Football Union of Russia (FUR), concerning unpaid salaries and bonuses under an employment contract dated June 6, 2016. The dispute was adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) under Swiss law, as the arbitration seat was in Lausanne, Switzerland. The Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA) governed the proceedings, with Article 187 of the PILA stipulating that the tribunal should rule based on the law chosen by the parties or, in its absence, the law most closely connected to the dispute. The parties tacitly agreed to the CAS Code's conflict-of-law rules, particularly Article R58, which prioritizes the regulations of the relevant sports body over other legal rules.
The contract between Astafiev and FC Mordovia stipulated a monthly salary of 460,000 rubles, performance-based bonuses, and a lump sum of 3,450,000 rubles payable in installments. The dispute arose when the club allegedly failed to meet these payment obligations. Astafiev filed a claim with the FUR Dispute Resolution Chamber (FUR DRC) on July 19, 2018, seeking unpaid installments. The FUR DRC partially upheld the claim, ordering payment of the fourth installment but dismissing claims for the second and third installments, citing overpayments in salary as covering these amounts. Astafiev appealed this decision to CAS on September 24, 2018, requesting a sole arbitrator.
Despite multiple communications, FC Mordovia and FUR failed to participate in the proceedings or submit responses. The sole arbitrator, Dr. Marco Balmelli, proceeded based on written submissions, as a hearing was deemed unnecessary. The club also did not comply with an order to produce additional documents, leading the arbitrator to infer that the withheld evidence would have been unfavorable to the club. The arbitrator emphasized that the burden of proof lay with the club, as the employer, to substantiate salary payments. The club's disorganized payment records and failure to provide comprehensive documentation undermined its claims.
The arbitrator ruled in favor of Astafiev, ordering FC Mordovia to pay 2,587,500 rubles, covering the second, third, and fourth installments. The decision highlighted the club's failure to meet its burden of proof and the importance of maintaining transparent payment records. The appeal was upheld, partially overturning the FUR DRC's decision, and all other relief requests were dismissed. The case underscores the legal obligations of clubs to adhere to contractual terms and procedural requirements in sports arbitration, with non-compliance leading to adverse inferences and rulings. The arbitrator's decision serves as a reminder of the consequences of failing to provide necessary evidence in disputes involving financial obligations.