The case involves a dispute between Lusaka Dynamos Football Club and player Dalitso Sailesi, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The core issue revolved around the termination of the player's employment contract due to the club's failure to pay salaries and bonuses. The CAS ruled that the standard of proof in FIFA judicial proceedings is based on "personal conviction," equated to "comfortable satisfaction," which is higher than the civil standard but lower than the criminal standard. The non-payment of salaries over a period, especially after written notice, constituted just cause for terminating the contract. The club's financial difficulties were deemed irrelevant to its contractual obligations, and misconduct by the player was found not to reduce compensation under Article 17 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP).
The factual background revealed a five-year contract signed in 2017, with the club accusing the player of misconduct, including late returns from international duty. The player countered that the club failed to pay his salaries, leading to his justified termination. The CAS panel focused on the club's breach of payment obligations, dismissing attempts to shift blame onto the player or cite financial struggles. The player subsequently signed with Nyasa Big Bullets FC in Malawi, and the dispute escalated to FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled in the player's favor, ordering the club to pay outstanding remuneration and compensation. The club appealed to CAS, but its procedural missteps, including missed deadlines and inadmissible submissions, weakened its case.
The CAS confirmed its jurisdiction and upheld the FIFA DRC's decision, emphasizing the club's failure to prove the FAZ Players' Status Committee met FIFA's standards for dispute resolution. The player's termination was deemed justified under Swiss law and FIFA regulations, given the club's prolonged non-payment of salaries. The club's arguments for reduced compensation, citing financial constraints and alleged player misconduct, were dismissed due to lack of evidence. The CAS noted a miscalculation in the FIFA DRC's mitigation of damages but could not address it as the club failed to raise the issue properly. The final ruling ordered the club to pay the player USD 14,500 and ZMW 8,000 in unpaid remuneration, plus interest, and USD 113,568 in compensation, with interest. The appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the principle of contractual fidelity and the importance of timely salary payments in professional football. The case underscores the procedural and substantive complexities in resolving international sports disputes, highlighting the need for adherence to contractual and regulatory frameworks.