The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued an award on February 1, 2022, resolving a dispute between Yeni Malatyaspor FK and Ghaylen Chaaleli, a Tunisian football player. The case centered on the termination of Chaaleli’s employment contract due to unpaid salaries. The player claimed just cause for termination, arguing that the club failed to meet its financial obligations. The sole arbitrator, Prof. Jacopo Tognon, ruled that non-payment or late payment of salaries constitutes a fundamental breach of contract, undermining the employer’s obligations. The club’s financial difficulties, including those linked to the COVID-19 pandemic, were deemed insufficient to justify non-payment, as external economic factors do not excuse contractual breaches unless they meet strict force majeure criteria—being unforeseeable, uncontrollable, and rendering performance impossible. The arbitrator noted that FIFA’s COVID-19 guidelines did not automatically classify the pandemic as force majeure, leaving such determinations to case-by-case assessments.
The dispute arose after Chaaleli signed a three-season contract with Malatyaspor in 2019, but the club failed to pay several salary installments. In April 2020, the player issued a default notice, and after partial payment, he terminated the contract in May 2020, joining another club. Before FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), Chaaleli sought unpaid salaries and compensation for breach of contract. The DRC ruled in his favor, awarding €330,000 in unpaid salaries plus interest and €1,306,014 as compensation for breach, adjusted for his mitigated earnings from his new contract. The club appealed to CAS, arguing that the pandemic constituted force majeure and caused financial hardships. However, the arbitrator rejected this, noting unpaid salaries predated the pandemic and the club failed to prove the pandemic made payments impossible.
The CAS upheld the DRC’s decision, emphasizing contractual stability (pacta sunt servanda) and the club’s inability to evade obligations by invoking financial hardships. The ruling reinforced that timely payments are paramount in employment contracts and limited the scope of force majeure defenses in football disputes. The club was ordered to pay the awarded amounts with 5% annual interest, failing which it would face a ban on registering new players. The case underscores the strict enforcement of financial obligations in football contracts, even during exceptional circumstances like the pandemic, and highlights the legal mechanisms ensuring fair resolution of disputes between players and clubs. The arbitrator’s decision reaffirmed the principles of contractual fidelity and the player’s right to just compensation for breaches.