The case involves a dispute between Al Hilal Khartoum Club, a Sudanese football club, and Chihebeddine Ben Fredj, a Tunisian football player, regarding the termination of their employment contract. The contract, signed on 20 July 2019, was set to run until 19 July 2020 and included financial obligations such as a signing-on fee, monthly salary, and additional benefits. It also stipulated liquidated damages clauses: USD 10,000 if the club terminated without just cause and USD 100,000 if the player did so. On 6 October 2019, the club unilaterally terminated the contract, citing a "technical recommendation," which the player contested as unjustified.
The player filed a claim with FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), seeking unpaid remuneration and compensation for breach of contract. The FIFA DRC ruled in favor of the player, ordering the club to pay USD 7,000 in outstanding remuneration and USD 85,530 as compensation for breach of contract. The DRC found the club's termination unjustified, as poor performance alone does not constitute valid grounds for termination under FIFA regulations. The decision included sanctions, such as a transfer ban, if the club failed to comply within 45 days.
The club appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing that the DRC’s decision was flawed and requesting nullification of the ruling. The club proposed a reduced compensation of USD 10,000, citing principles of fairness and reciprocity. The player sought dismissal of the appeal and confirmation of the DRC’s decision, along with reimbursement of legal costs. The CAS proceedings involved procedural exchanges, including the appointment of a sole arbitrator and disagreements over whether a hearing was necessary.
The Sole Arbitrator examined the validity of the compensation clause in the contract, finding it unilateral and disproportionately favoring the club, as the player's penalty was ten times higher than the club's. This imbalance rendered the clause unfair and null and void. In the absence of a valid contractual clause, the arbitrator turned to Article 17(1) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) to determine fair compensation. The principle of "positive interest" was applied, aiming to restore the injured party to the position they would have been in had the contract been fulfilled. The compensation was calculated based on the residual value of the contract, amounting to USD 89,000, minus earnings from the player’s subsequent employment, resulting in a final compensation of USD 85,530.
The arbitrator dismissed the club’s arguments, including claims of the player’s lack of good faith and violations of the principle of pacta sunt servanda, as unsubstantiated. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety, confirming the FIFA DRC’s decision. The ruling emphasizes the importance of fair and proportionate compensation in cases of contract termination, adhering to established legal principles and jurisprudence. The final award was issued on 17 March 2021, concluding the case with a ruling in favor of the player.