The case involves a dispute between Akhisar Belediye Gençlik ve Spor Kulübü Derneği (the Club) and professional football player Adrien Daniel Karoly Regattin (the Player) regarding the termination of their employment contract. The Club and Player signed an agreement on 31 August 2018, valid until 31 May 2020, with stipulated salaries and bonuses. The Player claimed the Club failed to pay outstanding remuneration, including partial salaries, rent allowances, and guaranteed bonuses, totaling EUR 116,128. After issuing a default notice on 17 July 2019, the Club responded by imposing a fine of EUR 209,000, citing poor performance and other alleged breaches. The Player terminated the contract on 2 August 2019 due to non-payment and filed a claim with FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), seeking unpaid remuneration, compensation for breach, and annulment of the fine. The FIFA DRC ruled the Player had just cause to terminate the contract due to unpaid wages but acknowledged the Club’s arguments regarding mutual termination discussions and the fine.
The Club appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing the termination was unjust and the compensation excessive. The CAS addressed key legal issues, ruling that a player cannot be forced to disclose transfer negotiations or be fined for subjective poor performance. It confirmed that non-payment of wages constitutes just cause for termination if the unpaid amount is substantial and the employer was warned. The CAS emphasized Article 17 of FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), which aims to ensure contractual stability by penalizing unilateral breaches. Compensation calculations should reflect the "positive interest" principle, placing the injured party in the position they would have been in had the contract been fulfilled. The CAS also highlighted the player’s duty to mitigate damages by seeking new employment in good faith.
The CAS partially upheld the FIFA DRC’s decision, adjusting the compensation to EUR 491,772 after deducting the Player’s earnings from his new contract with FC Cincinnati. The Club was ordered to pay this amount plus 5% annual interest, with a transfer ban imposed if payment was not made within 45 days. The CAS dismissed the Club’s claims regarding the fine and mutual termination, upholding the Player’s right to terminate the contract due to the Club’s breach. The case underscores the importance of contractual obligations in football, particularly timely payment of wages, and reinforces legal principles governing employment disputes in sports. The final ruling balanced the interests of both parties while upholding the integrity of contractual agreements in professional football.