The case involves a dispute between Rizespor Futbol Yatirimlari San. Ve Tic. A.Ş. (the Club) and Jakob Jantscher (the Player) regarding the termination of their employment contract and subsequent financial claims. The dispute was brought before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) after the Club appealed a decision by FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled in favor of the Player. The DRC had ordered the Club to pay outstanding salaries and dismissed the Club’s claim for compensation. The conflict arose when the Player terminated his contract on November 27, 2017, citing unpaid wages as just cause, while the Club argued the termination was unjustified.
The employment contract, signed in August 2016, included salary payments in installments and performance-based bonuses. In August 2017, the Club allowed the Player to negotiate a loan transfer, but no agreement was reached. The Player issued a default notice on September 22, 2017, for unpaid wages, leading to a "Protocol" signed on September 27, 2017, which outlined payment terms and set a deadline of November 25, 2017, for the Club to settle outstanding amounts. The Club failed to meet this deadline, prompting the Player to terminate the contract.
The legal analysis focused on whether the Player had just cause for termination under Swiss law (Art. 78 of the Swiss Code of Obligations). The Panel ruled that contractual deadlines ending on a Saturday are not automatically extended unless specified, and since football matches often occur on Saturdays, there was no reason to extend the deadline. The Club’s failure to pay by November 25 justified the Player’s termination.
Regarding compensation, the Panel referred to FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (Art. 17(1)), which allows for damages based on the "positive interest" principle. The DRC had awarded the Player unpaid wages and additional compensation, dismissing the Club’s claim. The CAS upheld this decision, confirming the Player’s entitlement to compensation due to the Club’s breach of contract. The compensation was calculated as the remaining value of the original contract (EUR 1,180,000) minus the Player’s earnings from his new contract (EUR 433,000), resulting in a mitigated damage figure of EUR 747,000.
The CAS ruled that the Player had just cause to terminate the contract due to the Club’s failure to meet financial obligations, and the Club was liable for the awarded compensation. The decision reinforces the importance of adhering to contractual payment terms in football employment agreements and the consequences of unilateral breaches by clubs. The Panel dismissed the Club’s appeal, affirming the DRC’s ruling in full and underscoring the legal frameworks governing such disputes in professional sports.