The case involves a contractual dispute between Flemming Serritslev, a Danish football coach, and the Papua New Guinea Football Association (PNGFA), with FIFA also involved as a respondent. The dispute stemmed from a coaching consultancy agreement signed in November 2015, under which Serritslev was appointed as the coach of the Papua New Guinea national team. The contract included provisions for monthly salaries, signing bonuses, and performance-based bonuses. However, Serritslev faced repeated delays and non-payments of his salaries and bonuses, leading to multiple formal notices sent to PNGFA between 2016 and 2020. In September 2017, the parties mutually agreed to terminate the contract, with PNGFA committing to pay outstanding amounts by December 1, 2017. Despite this agreement, PNGFA failed to fulfill its obligations, prompting Serritslev to escalate the matter to FIFA’s Players’ Status Committee (PSC) in June 2020. The PSC declined jurisdiction, citing a two-year limitation period for filing complaints, as the dispute arose from events occurring before June 2018.
Serritslev then brought the case before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), challenging the PSC’s decision and seeking payment of outstanding amounts, including interest and legal expenses. The CAS arbitrator, Prof. Petros Mavroidis, examined the validity of the PSC’s decision and the underlying contractual claims. A key issue was the timeliness of Serritslev’s appeal, as FIFA argued it was filed beyond the 21-day deadline stipulated by FIFA’s regulations. Serritslev contended that he had not received the PSC’s decision via email on June 30, 2020, and only discovered it in his spam folder on September 22, 2020, making his October 13, 2020 appeal timely. FIFA, however, provided evidence that the decision was sent to Serritslev’s counsel’s email address on June 30, 2020, and argued that notification was effective once the email entered the recipient’s control, regardless of actual awareness.
The arbitrator ruled that the appeal was inadmissible due to its late submission, emphasizing that professional representatives are expected to monitor their email accounts diligently, including spam folders. The arbitrator also rejected Serritslev’s argument that significant decisions must be notified via registered mail, as FIFA’s procedural rules permit notification by email. The CAS ultimately declared the appeal inadmissible and dismissed all other claims by the parties. The final decision, rendered on October 19, 2021, underscored the importance of adhering to procedural deadlines and the principle that legal notifications are valid once they enter the recipient’s sphere of control. The case highlights the challenges of contractual disputes in international sports and the critical role of procedural compliance in legal proceedings.