The case involves a legal dispute between professional football player Aloys Bertrand Nong and FC Pars Jonoubi Jam, centered on the termination of an employment contract and the validity of a subsequent settlement agreement. Nong, a Cameroonian national residing in Belgium, signed a one-season contract with the Iranian club in July 2017. The club failed to make timely salary payments, prompting Nong to issue default notices in December 2017. After repeated breaches, he terminated the contract on December 27, 2017, citing non-payment and other violations. Nong’s attorney accused the club of withholding his passport and coercing him into signing a settlement agreement, which allegedly hindered his ability to leave Iran or join another club.
Nong escalated the matter to the Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran (FFIRI) and FIFA, seeking intervention. Despite these efforts, the club and a subsequent employer, Saipa, allegedly obstructed his departure by retaining his passport and failing to secure necessary permits. Nong filed claims with FIFA in February 2018, but the situation remained unresolved, leading to further appeals to FIFA’s disciplinary bodies. A settlement agreement was signed on June 25, 2018, stipulating the termination of all claims and the club’s responsibility to arrange his exit. However, Nong later contested the agreement, claiming he was coerced into signing it to retrieve his passport.
The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) rejected Nong’s claims, citing the binding nature of the settlement agreement. Dissatisfied, Nong appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on February 25, 2020. The CAS proceedings faced challenges, including communication difficulties with the club and logistical issues in delivering documents to Iran. A sole arbitrator, Mr. Alain Zahlan de Cayetti, was appointed, and a hearing was held via videoconference on February 9, 2021.
Nong argued he terminated the contract with just cause due to unpaid salaries and that the settlement agreement was invalid under Swiss law, citing coercion and exploitation of his vulnerable state. The club denied retaining his passport or preventing his departure, attributing the delay to unresolved tax issues. The arbitrator found insufficient evidence to support Nong’s claims of duress, noting the settlement agreement did not mention passport retention and that his inability to leave Iran was likely due to administrative hurdles. The arbitrator emphasized the binding nature of settlement agreements under Swiss law, which require mutual concessions and are not invalidated solely by dissatisfaction with the terms.
The CAS upheld the FIFA DRC’s decision, dismissing Nong’s appeal and confirming the validity of the settlement agreement. The ruling underscored the challenges players face in cross-border employment disputes and the legal principles governing such agreements in sports arbitration. The case concluded with the original decision standing, and no further remedies were granted.