The case involves a dispute between AC Oulu and Aigle Royal Menoua over training compensation for a football player, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The central issue was whether the player's first professional contract was with Victoria United or AC Oulu, as this determined liability for training compensation under FIFA's Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). The dispute arose when AC Oulu signed the player in 2017 based on a letter of release from Victoria United, which stated the player was a professional. However, the player’s passport, later provided by the Cameroonian Football Federation (FECAFOOT), indicated he had been registered as an amateur with Victoria United and previously with Aigle Royal Menoua. Aigle Royal Menoua claimed EUR 30,000 in training compensation, plus interest, under FIFA RSTP.
FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) initially ruled in favor of Aigle Royal Menoua, as AC Oulu failed to respond within the stipulated timeframe, leading the DRC to base its decision solely on available evidence. AC Oulu appealed to CAS, arguing the player’s amateur status was unproven and questioning the reliability of the player passport, which was uploaded months after the transfer. The CAS panel, led by Sole Arbitrator Fabio Iudica, emphasized the adversarial nature of arbitration, requiring parties to substantiate claims with convincing evidence. AC Oulu could not provide the alleged professional contract with Victoria United or proof of salary payments, nor could it convincingly challenge the passport’s authenticity. The player’s testimony was inconsistent, further undermining AC Oulu’s case.
The Sole Arbitrator ruled that the player passport, as the official record of a player’s career, holds primary evidentiary value under FIFA RSTP and CAS jurisprudence. Since AC Oulu failed to prove the player’s professional status with Victoria United, the panel upheld the DRC’s decision, confirming AC Oulu as the first club to register the player professionally and thus liable for training compensation. The ruling underscored the importance of due diligence in verifying player documentation and the burden of proof in arbitration, where clubs must actively support claims with credible evidence. The CAS rejected AC Oulu’s appeal, dismissing all other requests for relief and reinforcing FIFA’s regulations on player status and financial obligations between clubs. The case highlights the procedural and evidentiary challenges in international player transfers and the critical role of accurate documentation in resolving disputes.