The case involves a legal dispute between Mol Fehervar FC, a Hungarian football club, and Joan Carrillo Milan, a Spanish football coach, along with the involvement of FIFA. The dispute arose from the termination of Carrillo's employment contract by Mol Fehervar without just cause, leading to a decision by FIFA's Players' Status Committee (PSC) ordering the club to pay compensation of HUF 99,000,000 to the coach. The club appealed this decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which issued its award on September 28, 2021. The arbitration panel addressed several legal issues, including jurisdiction, applicable law, and the merits of the case.
The panel first examined the jurisdictional arguments, rejecting the club's claim that Hungarian courts had exclusive jurisdiction over the dispute. The panel found that the employment contract did not clearly specify exclusive jurisdiction for national courts and concluded that the parties intended to resolve disputes through mechanisms like FIFA's judicial system rather than state courts. The panel also dismissed the club's argument that FIFA lacked jurisdiction due to the coach's failure to engage in prior negotiations, as stipulated in the contract, noting that this requirement was not applicable after termination.
On the merits, the panel assessed whether the club had just cause to terminate the contract. The club alleged that the coach breached confidentiality clauses by sharing confidential information with a former employee, Mátyás Czuczi. However, the panel found the club's evidence insufficient to substantiate these claims, as it failed to detail the nature, timing, or method of the alleged disclosure. The panel emphasized that the burden of proof lay with the club, which did not meet the required standard of comfortable satisfaction. Consequently, the panel concluded that the termination was unjustified.
The panel also addressed the coach's duty to mitigate damages, noting that he had secured new employment shortly after termination. The club argued that the coach failed to mitigate damages by not accepting more advantageous employment opportunities, but the panel rejected this claim due to lack of evidence. Regarding compensation, the panel upheld FIFA's decision, which did not award interest on the compensation, as the coach did not appeal this aspect. The panel emphasized its lack of authority to award interest in this case, as it could not exceed the scope of FIFA's original decision.
Ultimately, the CAS panel dismissed the club's appeal, confirming FIFA's decision in its entirety. The ruling underscored the importance of clear contractual terms and robust evidence in employment disputes, particularly in the context of international football. The case highlights the interplay between contractual agreements, sports governing body regulations, and national laws in resolving such disputes, with FIFA's regulatory framework taking precedence in the absence of explicit contractual exclusions. The panel's decision reinforces the primacy of FIFA's dispute resolution mechanisms in international football employment disputes.