The case involves a contractual dispute between footballer Helder Jorge Leal Rodrigues Barbosa and his former club Akhisar Belediye Genclik ve SK, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict arose from the termination of Barbosa’s employment contract, with both parties making financial claims against each other. The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) initially ruled that Akhisar owed Barbosa €62,500 in unpaid remuneration but also ordered Barbosa and his new club, Hatayspor, to pay €350,000 in compensation for breach of contract. This decision was appealed to CAS, which examined the case under FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) and Swiss law.
The core issue was whether Barbosa had just cause to terminate his contract under Article 14bis of FIFA RSTP, which allows termination if a club fails to pay at least two months' salary. While Barbosa claimed unpaid salaries and bonuses totaling €62,500, the CAS Sole Arbitrator found this amount fell short of the required threshold (€66,666). The arbitrator also noted that claimed bonuses lacked contractual or objective evidence, disqualifying them from being considered part of the salary. Although the termination did not meet FIFA’s strict criteria, the arbitrator acknowledged Akhisar’s bad faith, as the club had pressured Barbosa to waive earned remuneration and had a history of unpaid bonuses.
The arbitrator emphasized the principle of good faith under Swiss law, ruling that neither party demonstrated a genuine willingness to continue the contract. Since both contributed to the breakdown, Swiss law (Article 337b of the Swiss Code of Obligations) was applied to determine financial consequences. The club’s claim for damages was dismissed due to insufficient evidence of actual losses, while Barbosa’s claim for unpaid salaries was upheld. The CAS modified the FIFA DRC’s decision, absolving Barbosa and Hatayspor of the €350,000 compensation but ordering Akhisar to pay Barbosa €62,500 with interest.
The case underscores the importance of contractual clarity, evidentiary standards, and good faith in football employment disputes. It also highlights CAS’s role in balancing FIFA’s regulatory framework with equitable principles, ensuring fair outcomes even when strict legal thresholds are not met. The final ruling reinforced the need for clubs to fulfill financial obligations and for players to substantiate claims with concrete evidence.